Talk:Hydrogen iodide

message: The sentance "Once again, although chemically related, hydriodic acid is not pure HI but a mixture containing it." is not really necessary. all acids are of this nature, the very definition of acid is 'a substance in an aqeous solution'. Now, i can see the point of listing that HI is normally 98-99% or whatever was listed, but i think the sentance above should be removed and just say, "according to the definition of acid(and then we will put a link there), HI contains little water in solution."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.246.10.183 (talk) 21:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Definitions

message: Under 'Properties of hydrogen iodide' it says: "One liter of water will dissolve 425 liters of HI [...]"
Isn't it a bit unclear what is meant here (bear in mind I'm no chemist)? Is it 425 liters of (gaseous) HI at 20 degrees celsius? Gaseous HI has, I presume, a fairly low density which would mean 425 liters of HI isn't very much.
:425 is quite a lot, assuming normal pressure and temperature. It is almost 20 moles, or more than 2 kilograms. --Itub (talk) 14:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: HI solubility in water

message: Silberberg's Chemistry, 4th edition, lists the bond energy of HI as 295 kJ/mol, which means a photon of wavelength ~406nm will cause a molecule to break. Where was 578nm obtained from in this article? Also - why does wikipedia distinguish betwen dissociation energy and bond energy? No text I can find distinguishes them, and several specifically state they are the same. 169.233.62.35 18:55, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dissociation energy of HI

message: I have made a few additions to the article, mainly adding a few organic reactions of HI with ethers and alcohols, and also a section on use of HI in making methamphetamine. I am wondering what parts of the page you guys think still need much work, I would like to see this in the B class sometime.
Dffasd (talk) 02:33, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is way beyond "start" in my opinion, so I've rated it B. --Itub (talk) 14:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Article status

message: The density given in the infobox (2.85g/ml at -47 degrees(why this temperature??)) seems to be much too high for a gas; the German article has 5.8g/l at 0 degrees Celsius, which seems much more reasonable. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 19:44, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Density 

message: Why does the equation have water on the reactants side and water in the same form on the reactants side? --Cheminterest (talk) 20:36, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formation via phosphorus 

message: Why are our articles on HF, HCl, and HBr split along these lines, but not that on HI? Double sharp (talk) 01:47, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  HX (g) vs HX (aq) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hydrogen iodide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061006211537/http://www.camd.lsu.edu/msds/h/hydrogen_iodide.htm to http://www.camd.lsu.edu/msds/h/hydrogen_iodide.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Due to the "I" being larger than "H". Alfa-ketosav (talk) 11:39, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The shape is more like a lightbulb. 

message: Hey everyone, what are your thoughts about changing the lead sentence in some articles of non-organic chemical compounds to be seemed consistently? I have made two changes to this article and was all restored. Do your mind agree with the form: [Chemical compound name] is an inorganic chemical compound; it has the formula [Chemical formula symbol], link the word formula and bolden the formula symbol? 14.185.203.27 (talk) 14:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Any dicussion are opened in this page. Notify me about what coming up in your opinion. 14.185.203.27 (talk) 14:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @MicrobiologyMarcus What's your point of view? 14.185.203.27 (talk) 14:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: And more from, @Tollens, @Hoary, @Mike Turnbull 14.185.203.27 (talk) 14:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

text: MOS policy at WP:CHEMNAME says that bold in lead is reserved for common names not used in the article title (see Phenol), and the chemical formula should instead be displayed with the  template. microbiologyMarcus (petri dish•growths) 14:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Proposing: . microbiologyMarcus (petri dish•growths) 14:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose inorganic chemical compound as it is simple and unnecessary and removes useful descriptors as diatomic molecule and hydrogen halide. microbiologyMarcus (petri dish•growths) 14:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I agree your point. But I have to say that I might make the article inconsistent; therefore, readers cannot get the fact in a balanced way. 14.185.203.27 (talk) 15:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

text: To my mind, I think the inclusion is not important and it is a factor that keeps audience confused as it is a little adundant. 14.185.203.27 (talk) 15:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

text: From my experience, readers may definitely know what hydrogen halide is; therefore, we shouldn't explain what this chemical compound relate to or a halogen gas. 2001:EE0:4BC2:C190:74A5:B633:51B2:265D (talk) 02:54, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

text: @MicrobiologyMarcus, I think there is no need to wiki-link the formula. 14.185.203.27 (talk) 15:02, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

text: No worry, turn the formula to apply the template  14.185.203.27 (talk) 14:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @MicrobiologyMarcus, I need to gain consensus first and follow the agreement. 14.185.203.27 (talk) 14:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Your statement at the top of the section says you want to make wide changes to leads concerning multiple articles. You should first not seek consensus about that on this talk page about one article, but instead start an RfC at the Village Pump (proposals) section as it will have an effect on multiple articles, and allows other editors to weigh in. microbiologyMarcus (petri dish•growths) 15:12, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to seek consensus from many other editors to start the change from the agreement among ones. @MicrobiologyMarcus 2001:EE0:4BC2:C190:74A5:B633:51B2:265D (talk) 02:46, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

text: I have attracted attention from other editors as I tagged some influenced for the Wikipedia community to involve in and participate the discussion. Just to be all articles written in a consistent, and polish format. 2001:EE0:4BC2:C190:74A5:B633:51B2:265D (talk) 02:50, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistent grammar wording