Talk:Titration

message: Both are used in the article. This makes it look bad, while it's an otherwise rigorous writeup. Should I go through and flip all the occurances to color? Or to colour? I have no preferences, being neither British nor North-American.
:From WP:MOS,
::An overriding principle on Wikipedia is that style and formatting should be applied consistently throughout an article. One way of presenting information may be as good as another, but consistency promotes clarity and cohesion in Wikipedia articles. Edits correcting deviations from written style guidelines should not be reverted.
::Edits should not change a stable article from one guideline-defined style to another unless there is a substantial reason to do so that goes beyond mere choice of style. For example, it is not productive to change from British to American spelling unless the article concerns an American topic. When it is unclear whether an article has been stable, defer to the style used by the first major contributor.
:Since it would be tedious to find out which was used first, color or colour, I recommend that we just flip to the one that requires the least of corrections. Any objection by others should be useful. Aly89 (talk) 01:10, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color or colour? 

message: I'm working on a lab, and there is a significance about the "half-equivalence point." I don't know what that means, and I am failing to find any information on it. Someone care to add in this information? Goldy496 01:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Half equivalence point is the point when half of the amount of OH- ions have been added to neutralize a weak acid. In this case, it means that pH = pKa, or mathematically speaking:
-log [H+] = -log[Ka] 
Where [H+] is the concentration of H+ ions or Hydronium ions (H3O+) and Ka is the acid dissociation constant given by:
Ka = [H+][A-] / [HA]
I hope that helps. I'm not too sure as to where to put it though in the article. Tourskin 19:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  half-equivalence point 

message: Little problem with nomenclature: the endpoint and equivalence point are two different things during titration. The equivalence point is what was described in the article as end point. The end point however is the point where the indicator used for the titration changes color. It might or it might not coincide with the equivalence point -depending on the choice of indicator. Our best interest is, of course, is that the two are as close as possible to each other.
i want to know that why Potassium hydrogenphthalate can be used as a primary standard in volimetric analysis.
:Because it stays pure. Theresa Knott  (taketh no rest) 11:25, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It reacts with carbon dioxide in the air Theresa Knott  (taketh no rest) 11:25, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: To get the water out. Theresa Knott  (taketh no rest) 11:25, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  nomenclature 

message: I can't figure out why the titration curve only shows 1 equivalence point (the calculated Ka happens to be the Ka2 given in my book, though) - citric acid should have three equivalence points, as it's triprotic...? Amphibious Poptart 05:08, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  the titration curve 

message: Volumetric analysis now redirects to this article. A former version of the  volumetric analysis article contended that John Dalton had something to do with the early development of the technique.  Anyone know more about this? --arkuat (talk) 06:48, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: History of volumetric analysis

message: What has spectroscopy to do with titration? It's listed under types.
Is there such a type of titration? If so, please specify in the text, add some words. Bisco 16:55, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spectroscopy

message: The sections on "Preparing a sample for titration" and "Procedure" both read pretty much like a how-to guide, which Wikipedia is not. I don't think they have to go entirely (a general description of the titration method is quite important, as I see it), but they definitely need rewriting. Unfortunately I haven't done chemistry for a while and it would probably be better for someone else to do, but if no-one comes in soon I'll give it a shot. Confusing Manifestation 03:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please go ahead. Not only is this written like a how-to, but it also uses the second person which is against the Manual of Style ("make sure that all of your glassware...", etc.). --Itub 14:34, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

text: It's better now, although perhaps some of the information you removed could be readded in an encyclopedic tone in a section about "sources of error" (parallax, bubbles, indicator error, adding too fast, insufficient stirring, etc.). --Itub 07:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove how-to? 

message: I've suggested we split this. It would warrant its own article would it not? There is plenty that can be said on the subject of titration curves, but to go into all the details here seems a bit much. Smaller articles such as equivalence point and any others floating around could also be merged into it. Richard001 01:04, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with splitting this. Shall I do it, or will you?Bless sins 17:11, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Quick note, here are a few pics floating around for it: :Image:Oxalic acid titration2.png :Image:Oxalic acid titration grid.png.  I sent User:JWSchmidt some data I captured during a lab that he made those with, and there were other sets for strong acid-strong base, and weak acid-strong base curves if anyone wants to try to whip those up into a nice picture as well.  -- atropos235 ✄ (blah blah, my past) 02:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Done. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 11:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Titration curves

message: More could be needed on procedures of a titrations, including the cleaning of burete and pipette.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.163.251 (talk) 18:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More on procedure? 

message: You have taken this term for volumetric titration. However, there are other important types of titrations that are very different. For instance, Zeta potential titration. I do not want to modify your page without your opinion on this subject. I think that word TITRATION must be reserved for more general definition. More compact and general. With links to other types of titrations. For instance, your definition is mostly for VOLUMETERIC TITRATION. This text must be moved to that page. Page TITRATION must cotain only 
*general definition, similar to your but with comment that substance can be either in bulk or on surfaces for heterogeneous systems
*list of indicators, including zeta potential, see page indicator
*list of titration types with links to particular titrations
One more comment. Titrations can be done in non-aq solutions as well. 
User:AndreiDukhin October 23, 10:45 AM  —Preceding comment was added at 14:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Different types of titration

message: Concentration under procedures has been changed to molarity. 
Concentration is not the specific meaning of molarity as molarity is used in chemistry, not concentration.
The specific definition of molarity is In chemistry, molar concentration (also called molarity, amount concentration or substance concentration) is a measure of the concentration of a solute in a solution, or of any molecular, ionic, or atomic species in a given volume. as stated by wikipedia itself under "Molar Concentration."
Therefore, molarity is a measurement of concentration, concentration is not molarity.
It should not be revoked and changed back to concentration.
Thanks,
74.184.100.154 (talk) 23:26, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concentration or Molarity? 

message: There is a mention of a temperature of 60 degrees without reference to Celsius or Fahrenheit.  Would Celsius be right?
69.181.211.33 (talk) 22:59, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In this context, heating to 60 F doesn't make sense, so I fixed it to say 60 C.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.49.174 (talk) 00:36, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  degrees in which system 

message: Back titration is an article stub, and the details could easily be included in the titration page, especially in the section already set aside for back titration.  Neonfuzz (talk) 22:05, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: It seems to me that the titration formula could benefit from a side note showing how it is in fact a simplification of the stoichiometric process that could be used to arrive at the same answer. Showing the basic conversion process will show the casual user how the 'formula' works. That and I dislike unnecessary oversimplification, the basic process only has 3 conversions, really not rocket science, though it is vastly more explanative.
--68.144.79.58 (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simplified Titration Formula 

message: I'm Type II diabetic and have been taking Lantus insulin every morning for the last several years.  Every now and then, for various reasons, my dose needs adjusting, usually up.  My primary physician (actually a nurse practitioner) refers to the process of finding the proper new dose as titration.  That is, I increase the dose by two units and watch my morning and evening blood glucose levels for three days.  If they're not satisfactory, I add another two and try again.  If adding a total of six units doesn't work, I'm expected to ask for further instructions, although in my case it's never happened.  I don't know if this is a standard usage or not, but I'm recording it here in case somebody who knows more runs across it.JDZeff (talk) 05:14, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another use for the term 

message: I have seen these 2 terms used interchangeably in so many documents. Can someone please clarify their meanings?
My current stance on the situation is that titrant/titrator is the reagent, and the analyte/titrand/titrate is the unknown in the flask. Gerard2727 (talk) 22:29, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Titrant vs Titrate. 

message: how to see 2401:4900:44CB:2219:0:43:172E:5B01 (talk) 16:35, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  live reaction