Talk:Salt metathesis reaction

message: I believe that the example of copper sulfate + sodium chloride precipitating copper chloride is incorrect - At saturation, the solution would be ~2M in copper ion and sulfate, and 5.8M in Na+ and Cl-, but the solubility of CuCl2 is ~5.2M, so it's about halfway to saturated in CuCl2. Sodium sulfate should precipitate though.
OTOH, it's been a couple months since I finished general chemistry, so I'm not willing to edit it just yet.
71.36.200.118 05:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll look at it; i'm not too sure what the direction was of the author, so it'll take a few mins to see what he's after.  J O  R D A N [talk ] 08:43, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doubting but not certain of the CuSO4 + NaCl example under "aqueous metathesis" 

message: Move because no disambiguation necessary. --Rifleman 82 01:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: I don't know how it ought to be cited, but I'm a student at Advanced Technologies Academy, and I know that in the chemistry courses they teach here, "Double-Replacement" is the term encouraged. Perhaps just take off the [citation needed] tag?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.241.64.231 (talk) 19:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps a better term would be "not discouraged," as it seems that the norm is for old terminology to be discouraged in favor of new terminology. At my college, both metathesis and double displacement are acceptable terms.Ginogrz (talk) 02:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation involving the "Double-Replacement" terminology 

message: :The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the move request was: moved. Unopposed for over two weeks. Jenks24 (talk) 10:12, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Sorry I missed the discussion, but take a look at terms used in the last 10 years , , and . To me at least, "double replacement" is the most obscure. The most contemporary term used is "salt metathesis". I've heard of "double displacement", but it's supposedly as deprecated as "double decomposition". I'm aware that this page was listed by a bot in WT:CHEMISTRY but I am concerned that it did not get enough discussion. I'll ask the community to take a look at this in particular; in the mean time, my view is that metathesis is the most accurate and contemporary, and is the term used in the Gold Book. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 14:00, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

text: I also missed this discussion.  "Double displacement" is old fashioned terminology, maybe a high school term.  "Salt metathesis" is more contemporary in the journals and conversationally by practicing chemists.  --Smokefoot (talk) 15:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

text: Me too. I think it should have stayed where it was. Chris (talk) 18:34, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: "is a type of molecular process involving the exchange of bonds between the two reacting chemical species, "
It seems to me this should be better described.   In the cases mentioned where there are solutions of two salts being mixed,   the bonds between the original materials have already been broken by the process of solution  and are no longer in existed to be "exchanged".Eregli bob (talk) 07:16, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor description 

message: I was just studying the mechanism of Transesterification and, unless I'm mistaken on what exactly precisely constitutes a double-displacement (salt-metathesis), I think it may count as an example that may be worth noting. Albeit, it is *not* an ionic salt exchange, but instead covalent trades between an alcohol and an ester, but that seems to be covered in the main Salt Metathesis article, when it says "The bond between the reacting species can either be ionic or covalent." 
I'm tempted to add a section into the Types of Reactions section, showing that transesterification counts as an example, but don't want to mislead anyone if the strict chemical basis for double-displacement disallows for this reaction mechanism. 
If you have further info on whether yes, it does, or no, it does not, please let me know on my talk page. PolymathGirl (talk) 17:58, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldnt add it, although your observations are insightful.  My reasoning: (1) salt metathesis is really intended for salt-like reagents, (2) Wikipedia guidelines urge us not to make it into a textbook.  The encylopedia is intended to give and explain facts, but not to go much farther.  Also, most readers might not be as insightful as you, so they'd be confused.  But no one is in charge here, so follow your instincts. --Smokefoot (talk) 19:21, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transesterification = a double-displacement?? 

message: in the section on acid - base reactions
equation shows carbonate, but text is talking about bicarbonate  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polypipe Wrangler (talk • contribs) 07:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sodium bicarbonate or carbonate?