Talk:Bakelite

message: "Bakelite was the first synthetic polymer."
Interestingly it is not a polymer in the true sense of the word.  It is more of a resin.
"Due to its hardness and durability, it was considered as a material for making pennies during World War II, due to copper being needed for shell casings. Several patterns were made in 1942, but steel was used instead in 1943 and recycled shell casings in 1944 and 1945." - Where? The US, the UK, somewhere else?
Exactly what I was wondering.
Since pennies were made of steel in the US in 1943, I'd say it was there.  Stubblyhead 23:50, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct, Stubblyhead. more info here. Well heck, there's already even a whole wiki page for the steel penny. DMacks 01:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Polymer" or Resin? 

message: I learned today in a University lecture that Bakelite could apparently become volatile over time and can spontaneously combust, setting alight (and that this is a reason it wasn't actually the viable replacement to metal or wood it was proposed to be in the twenties). A tutor says that they have even seen it happen with an old Bakelite eggcup that exploded as it was sat on a shelf in the room she was in...Is this right? Mr.bonus 21:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  How is it going to "cause health problems" ? The asbestos fibers are ENCASED IN PLASTIC ! They can't get anywhere near you ! Unless you grind up your bakelite billiards balls and snort them, you'll be perfectly safe. Unfortunately :( 116.231.75.71 (talk) 07:17, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disadvantage 

message: I stumbled across this today, Bakelite The Plastic Age it gives a really good history. -Ravedave 17:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  history 

message: There's been a proposal to merge polyoxybenzylmethylenglycolanhydride with this one.  However, there's really nothing there to merge, so I think polyoxybenzylmethylenglycolanhydride should simply be redirected here to Bakelite. Rob T Firefly 13:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Support merge/redirect to here. Usually I think we'd go with the "actual" page at the generic name (vs trademark or product containing the chemical), but there's not much to say (or at least not much said) about the chemical and lots to say about the material itself (whose name has become generic). DMacks 14:00, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been a while with no further comment, so I'm mergeing/redirecting as per above. Rob T Firefly 21:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge 

message: Why Bakelite?
There were many reasons why bakelite was so popular with fashion enthusiasts around the world besides its cost effectiveness. The emerald, tortoiseshell, amber, and orange colors of Bakelite easily captivated the public. Bakelite jewelry saw a boom in popularity in both North America and Europe during the 1920s and 1930s as a result of its malleability and versatility.With its bright colors, easy malleability, and cost-effectiveness, it’s no wonder that Bakelite has become such an iconic material in the fashion world. <a href="https://pandorabracelet.co.uk/history-of-bakelite-jewelry/">Bakelite Jewelry</a>
Bakelite jewelry can now be seen everywhere from vintage stores to antique auctions, with each piece showcasing its own unique beauty. If you’re looking to add some classic style to your look, Bakelite is certainly a great choice. To learn more about this amazing material, you can read the Bakelite Jewelry Book or test for Bakelite jewelry using hot water or a chemical test. Whether you’re looking to buy a vintage Bakelite bracelet or create your own Bakelite necklace pendant, there’s something for everyone when it comes to Bakelite jewelry.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uniquewala12 (talk • contribs) 10:04, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bakelite 

message: A recent edit added the following:
: Bakelite was used widely from the late 1920s and throughout the 1930s for jewelry. Huge quantities of beads, bangles and earrings were produced by the Catalin Company which introduced 15 new colours in 1927, and created marbled and translucent plastics. [...]
Now I have no query with the broad statement of this addition, or even the individual facts stated in it. However I'm far from sure that "marbled and translucent plastics" have anything to do with Bakelite. AIUI, they are by definition going to be plastics other than Bakelite (in the technical sense) and thus out of scope for this article. If someone would please write Jewellery and decorative use of plastics between the wars, I'm sure that would be an excellent topic.
AIUI, the defining characteristics of Bakelite are phenolic resins used with wood flour. This gives an opaque finished product, with a tendency to dark colours, with some light speckling from the filler. Later pigments and fillers did give lighter colours, so long as they were strongly coloured. Bakelite can't deliver translucent or marbled effects. If a plastic of this period looks like that (and these were certainly common styles) it's celluloid or casein instead (maybe Lucite  acrylics later on), but they won't be Bakelite. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:50, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of Bakelite and "marbled plastics" 

message: Does it make any sense to include this chembox in the article? Albmont (talk) 14:13, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the diagram is not correct for phenolic (Bakelite) resins.  The terminal group -OH (from phenol) is correct, but the linkage should be shown as an ether linkage ( -CH2-O-CH2- from formaldehyde), and there are no methyl groups. The correct formula is located at http://chem.chem.rochester.edu/~chem424/novolak.htm If someone uploads the correct formula, it would be a useful addition to the phenolic resin article.  Sandcherry (talk) 13:05, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Added correct diagram courtesy of JohnSRoberts99 to article. Sandcherry (talk) 02:46, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chembox 

message: Can someone please go over this diff and address the copy editing. Although a GF addition, of content that warrants coverage, spome of the phrasing and particular issues needs improvement.
* Expanding the name in full isn't a good thing, if it then breaks the wikilink to the personal article.
* Copy-editing (throughout). No-one has a goal, "to develop a [...] that could be used [...] after he discovered it in 1907".  You have a goal, which is to discover something. After it's discovered you might use it. No-one's goal is to discover it in 1907.
* What particularly did he desire? Did he desire (as previously) a "hard, mouldable plastic" (i.e. a need) or did he desire (as edited) "a phenolic resin" (i.e. one solution). Was he only looking for phenolic resins? Did he already have this goal in mind, and why and when had he already come to that particular conclusion? Would he have been a bitter, disappointed man if he'd discovered acrylics or urea-formaldehyde resins instead?
* My empirical observation as a consumer of Bakelite is that it disappeared from decorative use during WW2 and disappeared from commercial use (knobs for electrical switchgear is the last use I recall) in the 1970s. So this fits with two reasons for its removal, fashion and the new brightly coloured plastics post WW2, and some relation to air pollution in the 1970s. One doesn't invalidate the other. Both would need referencing.
* The edit under 'Properties' that described the clean air act just doesn't hang together - it makes three or four separate statements (CAA, hardness, jewellery use, non-brittleness), all run-in as one. 
* "the Art Deco Period due to the shortage of metal" What shortage? This is the Jazz Age boomtime.
* "As an individual [...] I can attest to ". Not here you can't. WP:POV and WP:OR are a problem. It's WP:RS or nothing. Sorry, you can be right here, but unless it's WP:Verifiable (hopefully both right and verifiable), it doesn't go in.
Sorry to sound so negative, but this useful addition still needs work. Don't worry about reversion though - it's still in the page histories, so you can extract the actual work and re-use it. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:01, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent additions by [[user:Knowalitle]] 

message: Sir James Swinburne apparently discovered this substance independently.--MacRusgail (talk) 15:08, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Citation? Sandcherry (talk) 20:43, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swinburne 

message: There aren't enough to support the article as it stands, and unless additional sources are brought be bear, the article should be trimmed back. Just a head's up.... --Nuujinn (talk) 12:43, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources? 

message: I have updated the external link to the American Chemical Society National Historic Chemical Landmarks (NHCL) resource about this topic and corrected the NHCL name in the body of the entry. I am the program coordinator of the ACS-NHCL program, and the page that was referenced has been replaced with http://portal.acs.org/portal/PublicWebSite/education/whatischemistry/landmarks/bakelite/index.htm. KLindblom (talk) 16:37, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Update Link

message: The question about citing inventions' country of origin was submitted to the Help desk.  Let's hear what the broader user community says as this is obviously not just a Bakelite issue.  Sandcherry (talk) 23:52, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The Telephone is tagged as being a Scottish invention. I am using this as a precedent to tag Bakelite as being a Belgian invention. The argument for Bakelite not being elegible for the tag "Belgian" Was because Baek eland was abroad when he invented it. Same for A.G. Bell. Double standards are ugly things. Removal will be seen as vandalism. Kind reagrds83.101.79.45 (talk) 23:52, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  As you wish.  I listed Bakelite as both a Belgian and an American invention. Cheers! Sandcherry (talk) 02:42, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  See WP:OSE and also Wikipedia talk:CAT#Belgian inventions Simultaneous invention in two countries is not the same thing as invention in the USA, by someone who used to live in Belgium. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:56, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Therefore, should "Belgian invention" be deleted from this article?  Sandcherry (talk) 03:06, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

text: Baekeland was a Belgian citizen at the time of his invention, I have no idea if A.G. Bell was. More so , having multiple countries listed is not the exception. Telephone has 4 countries listed , Degausing has 2 , Television has 4 etc etc.. 83.101.79.45 (talk) 13:36, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Another example is the Crossflow_turbine Solely tagged as Hungarian . Wasn't invented in Hungary , The patent is held by a German . A Hungarian worked on it together with a German and an Australian. In this case , taking precedents into account , it would be valid if it got the Australian and the German tags as well. This just to illustrate. 83.101.79.45 (talk) 13:46, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mr Dingley , if a Belgian crapped in your proverbial potato field some time in the past I would like to take it upon myself to apologize , in his name , and in the name of all Belgians who today are getting targeted due to that person's inconsiderate action. I am also imploring you to stop your "eccentric" behavior that's been going in the last couple of days when it comes to Belgian inventions. Let me again specify , that about a week ago there was no such category. On the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Belgium we were made aware of this fact , and were asked to start tagging articles. We , anytare doing this to the best of our knowledge , and taking precedents into account when it comes to form. That is the sole reason why there has been activity concerning Belgian inventions this week. Nobody is trying to prove the planet was invented by Belgians .. I am happy to see you have at your disposal the amount of free time needed to question every single entry in our newly created category trying . And hope , with the recent spell of good weather we've been having you'll consider spending some of that time in the fresh air . Trying with all the force you can muster to discredit all those tags takes it's toll I imagine. Friendly Regards Phoenixxl (talk) 14:08, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  This isn't about Belgium, it's about the same trite claims and over-blown nationalistic self interest that pops up regularly any time one of these 'Inventions by country' categories pops up. I'd like to see some clear policy emerge for how we handle them: the same issues of expatriates, multiple inventions, early, failed inventions etc. are regulars. Andy Dingley (talk) 08:53, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah yes , the nationalistic Belgian ... Good luck finding one of those. And if you do find one , Stick him in a jar and mail him to me.  83.101.79.45 (talk) 09:48, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

text: I'm not an admin right now (explanation), and even if I were, this isn't a matter specifically for administrators.  I don't really have a strong opinion on the question, and one article's talk page isn't the best place to discuss such a wide-ranging question.  A better place would be WP:VP/Pr, a community forum where this kind of thing is frequently discussed.  Nyttend (talk) 03:07, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I submitted this issue to WP:VP/Pr where it is currently being discussed.Sandcherry (talk) 12:14, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the invention by country categories per village pump consensus, and added location of invention to article.  Sandcherry (talk) 02:29, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Invention country of origin

message: I'm surprised that the article says nothing about the claimed/possible toxic nature of Bakelite - maybe because of added asbestos(?). Myrvin (talk) 17:55, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toxic 

message: I'm thinking since the black Bakelite phone was a classic, it would be nice to have a picture of one on the page: maybe one of: Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 20:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The French phone you are showing was actually metal, I believe, only the handset was Bakelite. The second came much later, and I am not quite sure it was Bakelite anymore. The perhaps most notable telephone, and probably the first, that was made entirely of Bakelite was the Swedish DBH-1001 made by Ericsson. It was even announced, IIRC, as the Bakelite phone.  The Ericsson history site has some info on this too, if I recall. See also Ericsson DBH 1001 telephone.  The next candidate would probably be an Automatic Electric Monophone, or the model 34 (1934). Kbrose (talk) 21:23, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bakelite phone? 

message: I'm concerned that we're all being taken for a ride here. I can't find any references to this compound that come from BEFORE its use in the wikipedia page, and the name looks a little odd to me (methylENglyco). I am SO not an expert in these things, but this certainly would be a very effective place from which to spread a prank chemical name.
Riventree (talk) 13:10, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: +1 here.  Google knows naught. I'm thinking that if its correct, it should be methylENEglycol.  67.198.37.16 (talk) 19:26, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone check 'polyoxybenzylmethylenglycolanhydride'? 

message: It currently says ...methylenglycol... but shouldn't that be ...methyleneglycol... ? what justification is used to drop the 'e'? 67.198.37.16 (talk) 19:23, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  spelling 

message: Request Edit
Dear Sirs,
My company and its affiliates are the owners of the BAKELITE trademark with over 150 registrations globally.  I am writing to request that the ownership of the BAKELITE trademark be attributed to Hexion GmbH, Hexion Inc. or an affiliate thereof.   In addition, proper trademark use would require the BAKELITE mark be used as an adjective, modifying resins or thermosetting resins or similar.  Our BAKELITE trademark should never be used as a noun to avoid any possibility of the mark becoming a generic term.
In light of the above, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakelite  I would request that the first sentence read:  Bakelite® resin (/ˈbeɪkəlaɪt/ BAY-kəl-eyet; sometimes spelled Baekelite) or polyoxybenzylmethylenglycolanhydride was the first plastic made from synthetic components.
I would also request that “resin” or similar noun be inserted after each use of “Bakelite.”
I would finally request to include a footnote:  BAKELITE is a registered trademark of Hexion GmbH, Hexion Inc. or an affiliate thereof.
Thank you in advance for your assistance.  We appreciate you respecting our ownership in the BAKELITE brand.  
Best regards,
Lisa Jones
Lisa Kimes Jones
Hexion Inc.
Associate General Counsel, IP
12650 Directors Drive, Suite 100
Stafford, Texas  77477
U.S.A
Direct line:  (281) 325-3368 
e-mail: lisa.jones@hexion.com
The information contained in this e-mail communication is intended exclusively for the individual(s) or entity to whom it is addressed. This communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to print, retain, copy, disseminate or use this communication or any part of it. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete all copies.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by LisaJonesHexion (talk • contribs) 21:30, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested edit 

message: #The first sentence of the article in question already approximates the language requested in the COI editor's proposal.
# With regards to the COI editor's concern about trademark genericization, there is no current, formal policy regarding this scenario. As Wikipedia editors are not legally obliged to correct such usage to prevent trademark genericization, no action can be taken at this time. 
Background: A formal use of trademarks policy was proposed at Wikipedia:Use of trademarks in February 2012. This proposal failed because consensus for its implementation was not established within a reasonable period of time. I'll quote its language here as a reference to what Wikipedia's proposed stance on the changes you're requesting was as of 2012. That proposal stated, in part:
As stated earlier, this proposal failed to garner a consensus. Therefore, the policies which govern trademark use fall to Wikipedia's General Disclaimer, which states: 
Regards,  Spintendo  14:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Reply 18-DEC-2018

message: "Following the introduction of BD (Battle Dress). MI9 was forced to adapt to meet the challenge of a number of different compass solutions were devised, both covert and overt..."  This is clearly damaged.  Will someone with access to the source please correct it? J S Ayer (talk) 20:06, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:   Damaged quote removed.  Sandcherry (talk) 22:42, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

text: That appears to have been exactly as it was originally added. It seems User:Hadden, who added it, has not been active for half a year. DMacks (talk) 09:52, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Damaged quotation 

message: Theres currently a sourced sentence that says they did use bakelite, and another sourced sentence that says they use another superficially similar polymer. A cursory google search implies the latter is true, and its not actually bakelite used in the furniture and magazines of the rifle, but it needs a proper source for the issue to be corrected and I can't confirm how specific the sources currently used are as I don't have access to them. Khitrir (talk) 06:07, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use in Kalashnikov pattern rifles.