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 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | → | Archive 30 |
Hi all, I thought to put this as a topic in the Project rather than on the subject page as I think that it affects the subject pages for all the elements. There has been some debate about which synomynous terms to use for 'mean relative atomic mass' i.e 'atomic weight' and 'standard atomic weight' and the 'atomic weight' subject page is quite clear in explaining what the term means. The problem is that on the right hand side of the element subject pages, under General Properties, the term 'Standard atomic weight' is used, which is fine but then all the figures (that I have checked) have units after them. Following the 'standard atomic weight' link to the 'Atomic Weight' page tells you in the first line that it is a dimensionless property. I'm not a chemist and so am only going off what I have read around wiki but this is in itself an inconsistency and I'm favouring the general properties entry as the one more likely to be at fault. Should this be altered? James Jimbobolaffsson ( talk) 21:50, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Category:Chemical substances has been proposed to be merged into Category:Chemical compounds. 65.94.45.160 ( talk) 06:04, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Please comment at
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#En dashes in chemical bonds (permanent link
here).
—
Wavelength (
talk) 15:04, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
There was an unanimous support from the wp:WikiProject Pharmacology to merge Template:Drugbox into Chembox (see Template talk:Drugbox#Advantages of a drugbox/chembox merger). Therefore, I've made a corresponding entry for the WikiProject Chemistry side to get comments and views:
Mikael Häggström ( talk) 16:03, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I was trying to de-orphan this article Gold phosphine complex as part of that I googled for refs and it has heaps. Unfortunately I don't have a clue about this subject. If anyone is interested in expanding this stub here is the link to google scholar search [2] Blackash have a chat 13:33, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
VUAA1 Geographic Chemistry Sodium chloroacetate Per Johannes Kolsaker Radical disproportionation Friedrich Krafft Hexamethylbenzene 1,2,3-trichloropropane 1,4 – bis(hydroxymethyl)-cyclohexane Selenourea Sulfur chloride pentafluoride Food chemistry (journal) Thomas H. Chilton Joan Massagué Solé Spiruchostatins A Advances in Chemical Physics Benjamin Widom Travis Williams (Chemist) Aquametry Capnellene Thioketene Theo H. Siegrist California Green Chemistry Initiative Decyne Otolith microchemical analysis Protactinium(V) oxide Cadmium stearate Actinium(III) oxide Ferric ammonium oxalate Europium barium titanate Picramic acid N-methylaniline Potassium salicylate Imazapic Sulfur trifluoride Milton L. Lee Phenylsulfinic acid Di-(2-ethylhexyl)phosphoric acid Niobium oxychloride John Brown Herreshoff (chemist) Chromyl fluoride Gambogic acid Altechromone A Michellamine Sophoraflavanone G Europium(II) Sulfide Oliver Patterson Watts Joseph Schlenoff Rolf Appel Californium oxychloride Dimethylol Ethlyene Urea 3-Alkylpyridinium 2,5-diaminotoluene Thomas Burr Osborne (chemist) Slaframine David A. Tirrell Oxoborinic acid Magnetic chemistry Teprotide Organocerium chemistry
A few new ones I found I am sure most of them had already a look from sombody.-- Stone ( talk) 20:55, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
{{ OrganicBox hbond donor}} and {{ Style OrganicBoxTD 2}} have been nominated for deletion. 65.95.15.60 ( talk) 06:35, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
(Continuing the thread - is on Archive 22)
I have categorised all the structures in English Wikipedia into two categories.
I have started a proposal to delete the orphan images at Category talk:Unclassified Chemical Structures, and comments would be welcome there. I have a text list of all uploaders (extracted from the toolserver orphan images list), and I plan to use AWB to message the 622 different uploaders. Ronhjones (Talk) 22:32, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I am the Wikipedian-in-Residence at the Children's Museum of Indianapolis, which is opening a new permanent exhibit this weekend that includes Captain Kidd's Cannon as one of its central artifacts. They are placing QR codes to Wikipedia articles in the exhibit and were interested in a few articles being updated with more specific information about electrolytic reduction in regards to iron and salt water. The museum has a lot of research & videos regarding the conservation of the cannon and we'd like to share these with Wikipedians to update appropriately (perhaps in the electrochemistry and redox articles, and in the William Kidd and Captain Kidd's Cannon articles.) Is there someone available with enough basic knowledge to be able to write intelligently about this? Thanks so much. LoriLee ( talk) 15:23, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Could someone please check to see if this revision is vandalism? Other contributions by the IP have been so, but it does have a citation and is not unbelievable. Grandiose ( me, talk, contribs) 11:24, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm in agreement with the "valuable contribution" statement. I vaguely remember something about quasi enantiomers from stuff about chiral resolution from uni. Aside from that they've provided a reference. It perhaps needs a better explanation though. I think it refers to the similar chemical behaviour of two different compounds which are opposite enantiomers (e.g. halogen analogues). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.14.57.134 ( talk) 23:58, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Are the International Space Stations propellants environmentally friendly ? Does Kerosene and oxygen break down into water ? The propellants used for the spacecraft use different fuels and propellants, but how much harm do they do ? A student doing there homework could read the whole article and never know. I could use some help here. Anyone got 10 minutes ? Please come to the ISS talk page to help. Penyulap talk 15:50, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
I have nominated International Space Station for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.
Please understand, this is about an effort to improve the article, and get some new blood and new ideas into this article. Penyulap talk 15:50, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
{{ Chemformula}} has been nominated for deletion. 65.94.47.63 ( talk) 04:54, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I'm thinking about trying to reduce the number of unassessed articles over the summer. I'm thinking of using Template:Grading as a guideline, but I'm not really experienced with the finer points of classifying articles just yet. An example is plasma polymerisation: it seems to meet the B class criteria, imho. Referencing seems ok (although I'd rather it were more copious), the article is clearly structured and appears to be comprehensive and understandable. Prose seems ok, but not to A/GA/FA standard. The diagrams are useful. Is this assessment correct please? Thanks, Brammers ( talk/ c) 14:15, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello! For improvement and correction of some Wikipedia articles I am looking for anyone, who can help me, to translate a short article from Mandarin Chinese into English or German language. The subject of this article is chemistry, about a pesticide. You can find the article here: http://www.6lib.com/pdf/ADE4FE11177769273.pdf It contains the pages 3 and 4 of this pdf file. It is very important for me to get a translation and I will very thank you for any help. Kind regards, Doc Taxon ( talk) 08:59, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
The new article Periodic systems of small molecules may need review. ChemNerd ( talk) 19:08, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Comments welcome at Talk:Inorganic_compound#Mineral.27s_are_of_biological_origin. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 05:37, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
The JCW compilation updated a while ago. Here's the top-cited missing journals that are chemistry-related (at least as far as I could tell). I tried to make a division between medicine-related chemistry and "hard" chemistry, but I'm no chemist, and I didn't bother reading detailed descriptions of theses journals either. Feel free to edit the list, remove the useless ones, or move them around as need.
If you're interested to help,
Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals/Writing guide has some guidance about how to write an article on journals. Any help you can give would be much appreciated at
WP:JOURNALS.
Headbomb {
talk /
contribs /
physics /
books} 23:32, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
An editor keeps adding there something what looks like a project report to me [3]. Could someone have a look please. Materialscientist ( talk) 09:10, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Your comments are requested at a move discussion taking place here. Any constructive input would be greatly appreciated. Neelix ( talk) 13:00, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Hopefully this is the right place to post this suggestion. It would better fit into the Wikiproject Polymers, but sadly it is inactive at the moment.
I just noticed that the usual Chembox Templates do not cover many of the properties vital to polymers, such as glass transition temperature, whether it is considered amorphous or semi-crystalline, degree of crystallinity, mechanical properties (tensile strength, ...), resistance to chemicals and others. So maybe an appropriate template already exists and I simply couldn't find it, but if this is not the case I think creating one would make polymer articles more informative.
-- Evaa 15:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evaa ( talk • contribs)
There is an RFC on the addition of identifier links to citations by bots. Please comment. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:53, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
I'm not a chemist; I'm a mathematician, with some superficial all-round knowledge about natural science. Nevertheless, I sometimes edit chemistry articles or categories a little, at svwp (the Swedish wikipedia), or here on enwp.
Intermittently, I'm trying to get some order in Swedish "analysis" articles. Now, I've noted, that the "synthesis" articles largely are collected in a category, Category:Chemical synthesis, which also is a subcategory of Category:Chemical reactions, and fairly easy to find. I assume that the corresponding "analysis" category is Category:Separation processes, which it took a long time to find.
Among the articles dealing with "chemical splitting up" in a more general manner are (in alphabetic order) Bond cleavage, Chemical decomposition, Dissociation (chemistry), and Fragmentation (chemistry). None of these are found in the Separation processes category; instead, you have to go to Category:Chemical bonding, Category:Chemical reactions, Category:Chemical processes, and Category:Tandem mass spectrometry, respectively, in order to find them. I found just one direct linkage between them; Fragmentation is declared a special case of dissociation, in both these articles. Partly, I suppose this is due to them dealing with different aspects; I do appreciate that bond splitting is categorised as closely related to chemical bonding.
Still, I'm surprised, especially of the isolation between the articles Dissociation (chemistry) and Chemical decomposition. There seems to be a clear overlap, both of the concepts and the articles; but it is very hard to find one of them, starting from the other. If I understand the definitions correctly, chemical decomposition should be the broader concept, since it does not necessarily assume reversibility, and nor ionisation. However, the dissociation article does not absolutely demand reversibility.
I've wondered whether these articles partly could reflect competing terminological conventions. If so, perhaps they should be merged. If not, they should clarify the relationships between the concepts. In either case, I'd like to put them (and similar) articles into the Category:Separation processes, or appropriate subcategories thereof.
As I said, I'm not a chemist; therefore, I may have misunderstood the situation. Thus, I'm not going to do anything for a while. If you think I'd better leave things as they are, please write so; if you think you are better apt to provide appropriate categorisation and cross references (since you know the subject), please do so! Else, I'll start after one or a couple of weeks, doing as well as I can.
Best, JoergenB ( talk) 15:08, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Separation is to (literally) separate different compounds from a mixture. No bond breaking or bond making is supposed to happen (exceptions exist... derivatization), and instead of a mixture of ABCDEFGH, you now have separate fractions of pure A, pure B, ...
Dissociation and decomposition are similarly not related. Dissociation refers to how in vinegar, 4 % or so of acetic acid present exists as H+ CH3COO-; the rest remains undissociated CH3COOH. It is usually a reversible process. Decomposition is how things "spoil" when you heat it, expose it to air, etc. Once again, not related. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 15:38, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Apparently there's this article in C&EN, volume 82, issue 10, page 29 called "Grumping about Gaussian". However, I can't find it on the CE&N website. It's referenced a few times online, so I'm lead to believe it actually exists, but since Gaussian's a bit controversial, I'd like someone to actually confirm that it exists. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:08, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello people! I need advise (to help me, where I am stuck in article writing).
Is there any such an article, which would help non-chemist reader to let_know/understand, that weak acids are dissociated differently if submerged/dissolved in environment with different pH? (the same acid/compounds molecules are more dissociated at pH 7 and less dissociated at pH 5.5?)
To let You understand my case:
I am biologist and I do need to explain the chemical concept just enough, to let reader understand more general biological concept (topic of the article I am writing). Unfortunately, I can not find any article which would be dealing with that underlying chemical concept, or any section of any article dedicated to it in detail. (Or if I do, it is just only tangentially related, and so full of equations, that no normal biologist [or even layman] would ever understand it).
Somehow, somehow, I think it must, most probably, still be here somewhere, but I can not locate the proper article, proper section. Please help me find it (and I would use it as link for the reader in 'my' article for more details). I hope, you are more oriented in the structure of chemistry articles, than I am. To find linkable article is my plea.
I need to describe what the 'acid trap' is in the plant cell (and I need not, to waste too much words on it there, because even the acid trap is just one step of the chemiosmotic model, which in turns underlies the polar auxin transport - the target article). In fact the chemical property of dissociation is just one logical condition of the acid trap only, so I would prefer just to link to it, to allow flow of the text to be focused on the biological part (which in itself is quite difficult to explain and understand and be more digestible)
Acid trap of the organic acids is result of the different dissociation rates of the weak acids in different environments. Well, outside the cell the pH is lower (about 5,5) and inside the cell pH is quite higher (pH 7). Because of this, the weak acid (in this case auxin is the organic acid) outside the cell is dissociated only partly. (It is important here), the protonated form lacks charge }being relativelz lipophilic] and diffuse freely through lipidic plasma membrane inside the cell. Well, while being inside the cell, auxin (or just anz weak acid) immediatelly almost completelly dissociates. It is traped inside. It can not leave the cell on its own through diffusion.
Is there any such an article which would help non-chemist reader to understand, that weak acids are dissociated differently if they are submerged in environment with different pH? And why? (Not for me, but for the reader of the article Polar auxin transport)
Dissociation; pKa; acid; weak acid - non of them were helpful in the respect. Is there anything else, where would reader/student understand relationship between pH and degree of dissociation of an acid?
With regards and hopes Reo + 12:11, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Henderson-Hasselbach equation, buffer?
When
For example, if your pKa is 7 and your pH is 3, pH - pKa = -4, and [conjugate base]/[acid] = 10^-4 You have 10^4 acid for every one base. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 18:48, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
I don't think 50 % of IAA is dissociated at pH 5.5. Its pKa according to reaxys is about 4.5, which means at pH 5.5, 90 % of IAA is dissociated. At pH 7, 97 % is dissociated. --
Rifleman 82 (
talk) 22:03, 31 August 2011 (UTC) That doesn't take the basicity of the indole into account, of course, but I couldn't find the pKa or pKb. --
Rifleman 82 (
talk) 22:15, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
I hope the calculation I showed above (sorry it's not pretty) was helpful. While it is mainly used for buffers, you can use it to calculate speciation at a given pH, which is what I did here. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 00:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
I have nominated List of elements by stability of isotopes for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.). -- S Larctia ( talk) 08:57, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Members of this project may be interested to see that discussions at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of important publications in geology and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of important publications in mathematics, along with several deletion proposals for lists of publications in computer science areas, have been started. These follow a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of important publications in biology that lead to that list being deleted. -- Bduke (Discussion) 01:21, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
I've moved this article out of AFC, but it seems there's no agreement in sources what this name refers to, or the related CZTS. Have mörser, will travel ( talk) 03:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
There is a (IMHO silly) DR on European chemical Substances Information System. Any input is welcomed. -- Leyo 07:50, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
List of important publications in chemistry has been nominated for deletion. Discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of important publications in chemistry. -- Lambiam 22:18, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Could someone please take a look at this and assess it for inclusion (or not) into Wikipedia? The subject is a Guggenheim fellow , NIH fellow and a fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences. Is notable, since he fulfills criteria #3 ( here) but there doesn't seem to be a lot of independent coverage of his career. The article seems to need some additional refs. Thanks, Shearonink ( talk) 05:01, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Guys, can you create the article Non-ferrous metals? It is currently a redirect up for deletion. Thanks. -- Lenticel ( talk) 03:01, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
I know some people like lists, But is there a real need for this page? I could see a minor use for it as a sort of DAB page, showing all the WP organic compounds, but that does not fit in with the title line This is a list of well-known organic compounds, including organometallic compounds, to stimulate the creation of Wikipedia articles - then strictly speaking, neither does the current list - if it's main purpose is to stimulate the creation of Wikipedia articles, then by definition they should all be red links! What constitutes "well known"? - chemicals on sale? If so I could go to work tomorrow and export the Alfa Aesar catalogue and quickly add 30,000 red links (and just to keep it neutral - I expect a Sigma Aldrich employee could do the same). Ronhjones (Talk) 22:43, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone know how to go about compiling a list of vegetable fats? In this discussion, two other editors and I have determined that the vegetable fats currently listed on List of vegetable oils should probably be split off into their own list at List of vegetable fats, but we're unsure how many other vegetable fats there are or how we might determine what they are. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Neelix ( talk) 03:03, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
There is an AfD on Basic concepts of quantum mechanics that raises some important questions for many technical articles:
This chemistry-related AFD has been relisted because of few comments, so it's probably worthwhile for a few chemists to drop by and give their opinion. ChemNerd ( talk) 13:42, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Category:Phenols is, in my opinion, way too subdivided into subcategories. According to this tool, there are 308 (!) subcategories. Many contain only one or two articles. I'd like to start a discussion on how to trim this down considerably. To start, I would suggest that categories that make the distinction between natural and synthetic are unnecessary (and in many cases that distinction is meaningless because phenols isolated from natural sources may also be prepared synthetically). Below in the collapsed box is a list of all 308 subcategories (some may be duplicates, though). ChemNerd ( talk) 19:02, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
As in the past, I work with aspiring chemists in developing articles for Wikipedia. This fall we aimed a little more on article improvement vs article creation. Already these articles have been considerably upgraded by colleagues here, especially Rifleman 82 and Materialscientist. We're not quite done, but here is the list: thiourea dioxide (unusual reagent used in textiles), boroxine (class of heterocycles), ceiling temperature (concept in polymer chemistry), 1,2-diaminopropane (smallest chiral diamine), levopimaric acid (major component of tree rosin), titanium ethoxide (used in sol-gel processing, also info on Zr derivative), chain walking (concept in polymer chemistry) mineralizer (tool in producing synthetic minerals), , humulone (component of good beer, apparently), sulfenamide (a functional group useful in vulcanization), sodium decavanadate (focused on the polyoxovanadate anion), benzotriazole (expanded, used as a corrosion inhibitor with Cu), aluminium phosphide (expanded description of a rodenticide, also phosphide).-- Smokefoot ( talk) 10:02, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
There's a request at the help desk for a chemist to review the new article Ditetrahydrofurylpropane. -- John of Reading ( talk) 20:40, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
Template:Chembox subst explosive has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. 76.65.128.198 ( talk) 07:01, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
I have absolutely no idea if Hydroboration–oxidation reaction and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hydroboration are covering the exact same subject, cross over, or completely different things. Clearly, a more expert opinion and review needed here. Thanks muchly for any help that can be given. sonia♫ 08:20, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi, someone is creating lists which just seem to be copied from some database ( WP:NOTADIRECTORY). Perhaps someone from this project could take a look at whether this is justified, as this is not my field. Thanks. -- Guillaume2303 ( talk) 06:40, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
two OrganicBox templates have been nominated for deletion, I don't know where in the coding that the infobox calls these, so if someone knows, they should check it, see Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_December_20
76.65.128.198 ( talk) 06:20, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
The Category:Screenshots of television ( catgraph) is in the chemistry cattree, i.e. a subxcategory of Category:Chemical substances. Can anybody fix this? -- Leyo 12:07, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
depth=4
. --
Leyo 15:22, 23 December 2011 (UTC){{ Aldehydes}} and {{ Alchemy}} have been nominated for deletion. 76.65.128.132 ( talk) 04:25, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Above ( Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chemistry#Overcategorization_.28again.29) I asked about the overcategorization of phenols. Based on the suggestions I received, I starting consolidating some of the hundreds of subcategories, starting with ones that only had a couple (at most) of articles classified in them. I then starting marking the emptied categories for deletion. However, User:NotWith (who seems to be the same person as the blocked User:Nono64) has simply reverted my changes and started to recreate the deleted categories. Any assistance or guidance from others would be appreciated. ChemNerd ( talk) 12:44, 28 December 2011 (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)
The article Energy level is about the various energy levels of atoms, ions, molecules, and crystals. I have placed the WikiProject Chemistry tag on its Talk page indicating Start Class and High Importance. There were already WikiProjects Physics and Spectroscopy tags on its Talk page, indicating also Start Class and High importance. H Padleckas ( talk) 06:29, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
There's a requested move at Talk:Cation–pi interaction that could probably use the input of some people who have more knowledge than the layman. Cheers, Jenks24 ( talk) 08:49, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
I saw a note from Smokefoot on one of my students pages, and I now feel guilty for not posting here sooner.
I teach a graduate-level course on "organic reactions" and, as part of that course, I help students identify important (to organic chemists) reactions which have no article or only a very short article (generally limited to Stub-class). We spend a few class periods discussing the Wikipedia, audience analysis, peer/self review, and some technical aspects of the Wikipedia (making graphics, mostly). For the writing part, we bring in a professional instructor in scientific writing. The students outline an article, get feedback, write a draft, get peer review, revise, get reviews from me, and finally revise once more. The finished products are moved into the articles. I emphasize etiquette: we strive to choose articles that are not under active development and they are told to note their work-in-progress on the "Talk" page. It is not my intention to "drop" a large bolus of mediocre articles on the community - each article, although not perfect, has actually been reviewed for writing, content, etc. by at least three people before making it out of the sandbox! A list of articles we have contributed to can be found at my user page and if you have any major problems with one of my users, please don't hesitate to contact me.
In the future, some highly motivated graduate students are forming a club in our department to do further work on the Wikipedia. I will be supervising. We hope to work on some of the bigger game - higher impact, longer articles - as a group in addition to smaller edits on our own pet areas.
I think this is also the appropriate venue to thank you all for your collective work to make Wikipedia a better, more reliable source. I have seen it come a long way in chemistry in the past few years. Thank you also for the WikiProject Chemistry documents, especially the style manual! I found them clear and very helpful. We have developed some nice work-flows for making reasonable SVG graphics for chemists, which I'd like to post.
Thanks again for all your hard work. I hope we have helped in a small way and I hope that we will contribute more in the future. Dweix ( talk) 04:05, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Also, do remind them to check out the article and user talk pages from time to time. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 04:55, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
There's a lot to be said for doing stuff in sandbox (even offline) and then adding it. Just one small thing to make it go better. Make an announcment on talk page that some major work is going on in sandbox or offline. Then if no one says anything, really no right to complain about a big revision dropping in (and we all know there are dead articles). We gotta be able to makes stuff like this work...it can't be that hard to onboard people? TCO ( talk) 03:52, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I have proposed a new section to the Biomonitoring article on that article’s talk page for, but have not received any response as I don’t think that talk page sees a lot of traffic. I'm new to Wikipedia and have a WP:COI with the subject, but I believe my proposed changes to the article help bring it more up to date with evolving science on the subject.
If anyone is interested, I’d really appreciate any feedback or suggested revisions to my proposed material. Thanks. - Unbachar23 ( talk) 19:13, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
The article Raney nickel needs a liitle help to avoide FAR and to remove the citation neded tags. -- Stone ( talk) 13:13, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
The nanotechnology portal had laid abandoned for quite some time, but I'm now setting it up to automatically rotate through a selection of articles and images over the course of a year. I'm looking for some input on which content should be used; if you have any ideas, the discussion is at Portal talk:Nanotechnology/Selected article. Thanks! Antony–22 ( talk⁄ contribs) 02:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
I came across a compound which has carboxylic acid groups attached to all the para positions in tetraphenylethylene. Do any of the anions have resonance structures which delocalize over the entire molecule? -- HappyCamper 15:51, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
So, there's a new project which may be of interest to some here. It arises out of Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#UID_interface_to_Wikipedia, a proposal to make wikipedia articles available by their unique identifier - for instance by their PubChem number. Umm. For reasons which should be all to obvious to anyone interested in computational access to information. And those two pages are all I have to show you, but I live in hope of input from you to take it all further. -- Tagishsimon (talk) 22:21, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Category:NFPA-H=0 and 14 other categories which are within the scope of this WikiProject, have been nominated for deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:55, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
See discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disambiguation#Category:Molecular_formula_disambiguation_pages. Pam D 18:55, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:Chemistry will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in chemistry's history, society and culture. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch ( talk) 00:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Come on, peeps. One team, one fight. Srsly. You gotta try to find things to make things work indirectly sometimes...like judo. This is probably not the target rich environment that Project Horse is, sure, but ya never know...maybe there is some connect if we scratch heads really hard... but if someone finds something useful that helps both parties all for the good, even if going at it for different reasons.
For instance, I'm not into some super affirmative action gender quota thingie...but at the same time, I happen to like one topic that is "female" oriented. [Gymnastics, don't tease me...I'm sensitive! ;-)] So Sarah wants to find the content that interests women. I just...eh...want to get the particular content expanded. Different ulterior motives, but still a payoff if it works.
An analogy is Sue G. wants a less kldugey interface to entice newbies and low quality editors. I want a less kludgey interface because it will increase the output of the power users! Like working in MS Word is about a bazillion times easier than wiki markup tables and the refs all displayed inline in edit mode. Also, it makes the hurdles lower to bring smart academics and the like who know a heck of a lot about a topic AND how to write prose...but who don't want to become computer coding jocks with the damned wikitables and cite stuff (and find it hard to really look at and edit the text when like 50% of it is markup code. WYSWYG is the norm in office environment for about last 20 years at least.
TCO ( talk) 21:16, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
SarahStierch, greetings! Amazing... I'm not the only female in the Wikiverse. It is nice to see that! I was trying to figure out how to contribute to the Chemistry WikiProject, noticed several pages that could use copy edits, then spent the past two hours reviewing the Manual of Style, open article list, tag system, bot page to-do listing etc. I am still uncertain what the criteria is for participation though. I know this isn't the appropriate way to introduce myself and make inquiries, but since it is WikiWomen's History Month, and I AM a woman, I thought I'd seize the bull by the horns, so to speak. I was grateful for
Gobonobo's kind suggestion to peruse
Category:Women chemists. After a cursory review, it seemed that
Angela Merkel, yes, The Chancellor, is in fact one of the better examples of living female chemists, at least according to her Wikipedia biography. She was graduated with a university degree in Physics, worked as a professional in the field of physical chemistry for 13 years (1978 - 1990) for a government organization (I think it was...it was in Germany, about which I am less familiar), wrote a doctoral dissertation in Quantum Chemistry and earned a PhD for that. She even published a few research papers. I could understand if you didn't want to focus on Mrs. Merkel exclusively for Chemistry, given her visibility in other areas at present, and the fact that she no longer works in any scientific field, nor has done so for many years. On the category listing for Women chemists, I also noticed
Cleopatra the Alchemist and
Mary the Jewess. This is questionable, particularly the latter, as she seems mostly mythological, first appearing in the days of Deuteronomy and continuing to receive accolades for her alchemical and alembic-making expertise through Medieval times and the Renaissance! (Also, I am a Jewish woman, and Mary the Jewess is a cognomen that is ridiculous on a variety of levels.) I will dig around for some other living (or even deceased) female chemists of note, as I would prefer that those two individuals, Cleo (not the Queen of Egypt) and Mary, were replaced, or at least appeared less prominently by virtue of there being more than a dozen other Women chemists listed. There must be other prominent women chemists besides
Madame Curie and
Mrs. Merkel... although
Rifleman 82 is correct about the preponderance of dead white men. Final item: If I want to copy edit or improve internal references to a {{Chemistry}}
WikiProject page, may I just announce my intentions on the talk page and proceed? I read the Chemistry Style Guide, understand and agree to comply with the standards of incremental editing. I'm thinking of the
Periodic table page in particular. Lord knows which "Chemical Society" is referred to there! However, I did find an existing Wikipedia page about the relevant one. THAT page has plenty of sentence structure irregularities, so I'd like to tidy it up a bit, then go through the
Periodic table page and replace all the un-Wiki-linked references to "Chemical Society" accordingly. (As you no doubt know, there were many chemical societies in the 1800's, not all in the U.K. either. Mendeleev and his peers even had a chemical society or three in Russia <insert minor smile of irony and goodwill>). I'd also like to help in a few other areas for which my skill set and limited knowledge is suited. I won't go into detail now, as this as been quite enough already ♥ Thank you for your patience. --
FeralOink (
talk) 15:15, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Do you guys like this?
The Chemistry Barnstar | ||
This barnstar is awarded to users who have made significant contributions to the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. -- Extra 999 ( Contact me) 05:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks for the positive response, feel free to use it. I 've added it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry/Materials, you can use it by: -- Extra999 ( talk) 03:54, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
{{subst:The Chemistry Barnstar|Your message here. ~~~~}}
I encourage WikiProject Chemistry members and supporters to comment on a proposal to rename a section title and, more importantly, make stronger limitations on the use of primary sources in chemical articles. Please chime in on the talk page for the CHEMMOS. Thanks USEPA James ( talk) 16:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Could F. Gordon A. Stone be added and assessed by wikiproject chemistry?-- Gilderien Talk| Contribs 21:44, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Should Wharton olefin synthesis and Wharton reaction be merged? Please comment at Talk:Wharton reaction D O N D E groovily Talk to me 04:14, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
A group of articles of interest to this WikiProject have been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2C-TFM. Please feel free to contribute to the discussion. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 15:20, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
I have been working through all the pages that have links to the disambiguation page Conjugation, but I have been unable to resolve those listed here. I am hoping that an expert from this project will be able to fix these. MOFs for Catalysis, Bissulfosuccinimidyl suberate, Autoinducer, Diazonium compound, Hyperconjugation, Buchner ring expansion, Quinone methide, Steroid Delta-isomerase. Thanks. Derek Andrews ( talk) 16:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Template:SIDS presumes that the target page at OECD Screening Information DataSet (SIDS) is pdf. This is not always the case (e.g., the L-ASCORBIC ACID page is html). Please see the proposed update to the template here: Template:SIDS/sandbox; and test case here: Template:SIDS/testcases. Decstop ( talk) 01:57, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Is there someone with good skills in TeX? The (upper) equation image in Sodium phosphide#Uses should be converted, but my tries were not successful. -- Leyo 18:38, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
I was trying to find out what two chemicals and/or elements you would have to mix to make the colours pink and purple for a science project but when i read all of this none of it made sense but the purple. Can someone please change the info so its easier to read?????????????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.183.55.198 ( talk) 16:53, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
The image " File:Brake_shoe_metal_specimen.JPG" ( talk) is causing confusion across WP and leading to some embarrassing mistakes. A glance at the picture will show why: 3 of the 4 samples in the back row are nonmetals (Si, C and P). Example: the picture was being used with the caption "Some metal pieces" at the top of metal; I fixed that, but it looks like similar elementary (ha ha) mistakes persist on other pages using the image. These pages (most not in English) need to be fixed and, imo, the title and description of the file need to be changed. regards, Middle 8 ( talk) 00:02, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
This seems relevant to you guys, since it's discussing whether or not to merge/redirect to this project, or just delete. Axem Titanium ( talk) 13:43, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated this page for deletion. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C8H3NO. ChemNerd ( talk) 17:32, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Are the following orphaned GIF ball-and-sticks models worth being moved to Commons?
-- Leyo 15:06, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Template:The Chemistry Barnstar has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
mabdul 06:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
PS: This is only a merger proposal of two barnstars.
I would like to know a bit more about the linear dinamic range as well as the sensitivity of the FID,TCD,SCD,PID,AED,ECD,FPD,and the TID. The properties that the stationary phase should have for the GC and the LC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.10.190 ( talk) 15:52, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
It just seems that this article is some form of original research and it is also sort of a textbook thing. Comments on what could be done with this pretty strange article.-- Smokefoot ( talk) 13:29, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps biogenic phenols might be a better title. I don't like the title, because it seems to be associated with the strange "natural=harmless and beneficial" ideology. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 17:24, 19 April 2012 (UTC)