Talk:Vinyl chloride

message: If you search on ethylene chloride, you end up on the vinyl chloride page. Traditionally the term, ethylene chloride has referred to 1,2 dichloro ethane. There should be at least a disambiguation page for this. Karl Hahn (T) (C) 17:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect from ethylene chloride

message: There's a lack of Referencing under subheads of Vinyl chloride monomer and Dioxin. They seem to have footnotes but they aren't referenced.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.45.10 (talk) 20:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See the section below for an explanation: I'll now bring over the refs from the original article. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Lack of Referencing

message: A year ago, with this edit, an IP copied a section from Polyvinyl chloride into this article. The move wasn't attributed at the time; please see the page history of Polyvinyl chloride for contributor attribution. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contents merged in from [[Polyvinyl chloride]] 

message: The subsection on dioxins should be moved to the Dioxin (chemical) page. The text primarily discusses health effects of dioxins generated by burning PVC. Dioxin generation is more closely linked to PVC production and use than to VCM production.ChemE50 (talk) 23:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Health Effects

message: "Ethane sulfochlorination has been proposed as a route to produce vinyl chloride using sulfur instead of oxygen" suggests a direct analogy to the oxychlorination process but with sulphur instead of oxygen. However, this link, in the other processes routes, is redirected to the Reed reaction, using sulphur dioxide, chlorine and a photochemical process to form sulphonyl chloride groups on alkanes, i.e. not chlorosubsituted alkenes. One sample product is called chlorosulfonated polyethylene (CSPE). It seems that the two terms sulfochlorination and chlorosulfonation are distinct from each other but have been mixed up. One culprit seems to be the redirection and possibly a missing proper sulphochlorination article. The product name "chlorosulfonated polyethylene" also contributes to the mess. It would be nice if somebody could state what the correct nomenclature is but even if "chlorosulfonated polyethylene" is incorrect it may be established and then some explanation and disambiguition of the concept "sulphochlorination" is needed. I don't know how to change the redirection but will unlink the sulfochlorination link.150.227.15.253 (talk) 09:57, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed that remark.  It is based on one sentence in the Ullmann encyclopedia, supported by this patent: Seymour C. Schuman, US 3 377 396, 1968.  Otherwise, a search of ChemAbs seems to indicate that sulfochlorination involves the addition of Cl-SO2R across double bonds, as illustrated with this recent paper: "Fast Heating-Assisted One-Pot Copper-Catalyzed Sulfonylation and Sulfochlorination of Styrenes" Jorge Saavedra-Olavarría, Patricio Hermosilla-Ibáñez, Iriux Almodóvar, Edwin G. Pérez in Eur. J. Org. Chem. doi.org/10.1002/ejoc.202101526.--Smokefoot (talk) 20:47, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sulfochloronation link 

message: I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:CS, WP:NOR, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 14:24, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncited material in need of citations

message: The article cites "EPA", without stating what EPA it stands for. One can guest it is some official controlling body from the context, but people like me have no idea if it's some local organization or a UN agency. 85.195.209.11 (talk) 12:51, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  EPA 

message: Article lede states "About 13 million tonnes are produced annually." 
But in the Production section, it states "Approximately 31.1 million tons were produced in 2000."
This difference hurts the credibility of the article.
More scrutable and well-known reference sources would help in resolving this huge discrepency. (Some major encyclopedias e.g. EB, don't attempt this number.)  In the meantime, I'm removing both statements.  Twang (talk) 21:09, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting vital information