Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals/Archive 2006

message: I hope people don't mind, I tagged (on the talk pages) all of our A-Class articles as "Good articles" and listed them here.  I think it will help raise exposure of these articles to a wider audience.  I noticed a couple of things:
* Acetic acid is listed there still, yet it is now an FA.  Can I remove it?
* Folic acid has a "cleanup" tag on it.  Can someone more biochemical than me address this?  I will leave a message for User:Borb.  If it doesn't get cleaned up soon, shouldn't we demote the article to B-Class? Walkerma 07:25, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class articles 

message: Hello.  I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask this, but I came across Ammonium thioglycolate while random paging today, and I think I needs a little attention.  Its content is fine, but I think perhaps a more experienced chemist could perhaps take a look at the language and make it a bit more formal.  Thanks.  MJSkia1 03:33, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have rewritten the page as requested.  I have strong doubts about one part of the chemistry, so I posted a "disputed" tag and posted my reservations on the talk page.  I also left a message with the original author, requesting a reference. Walkerma 04:54, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

text: UPDATE: K resolved the disputed tag very nicely, and PC added a small chembox, now a respectable looking stub IMHO.  Thanks for bringing it to our attention! Walkerma 05:10, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ammonium thioglycolate 

message: Under "What links here" for ether, the functional group, there are several hundred links.  I've noticed that most them really should be directed to diethyl ether, the solvent.  I've gone through the first hundred or so and pointed them to the correct article, but there are plenty more to do.  I'll try to get some more done in the near future and maybe someone else can help out as well. Thanks.  Edgar181 16:40, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I corrected a few of them.  Another similar situation exists with alcohol.  There are thousands of links to that article about the functional group which should be directed at alcoholic beverage or ethanol.  But maybe that one does not need the effort to correct them because there is a note at the top directing to those other articles. MikeParker 14:11, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we ought to have a go at correcting them, although there are nearly 2000 links: I don´t see what George W. Bush has to do with organic chemistry, for example... Physchim62 (talk) 16:56, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the mention of alcohol.  I have wasted much time reverting drunken idiots on that page, and it never occurred to me (duh!) that they might have been linked into there.  I did about 50 of these with the edit tag "dab alcohol" and I will do some more, this should hopefully reduce vandalism. I think ether is less of a vandalism problem. BTW, the ether page used to be mainly about diethyl ether up until a year or so ago I think, that may explain the problem. Walkerma 17:52, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I think ether is done now, except for user and talk pages.  The remaining links should be for ether, the functional group. I'll now try to help out a bit with links to alcohol.  Edgar181 19:42, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to [[ether]] 

message: I would like to add magnesium sulfate to the project, may I put the notice on the talk page? Or someone else do it the way its supposed to be done. User:218.103.132.85
:I have added the template as requested, we should have done this.  I will even try to get a photo of some MgSO4 soon to spice up the page a little! Thanks, Walkerma 06:02, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magnesium sulfate 

message: A while ago I started the list inorganic compounds by element, where compounds are listed by fomrula (rather than by name as on list of inorganic compounds).  One aim of this was that if someone did a Google search on (say) AlGaAs2, they might find this page, and then find their way into the article.  Google does now find the page, yet if one types AlGaAs2 into the search as well, it finds nothing. If one goes to the page itself and does an "Edit-Find in this page" it finds AlGaAs2 without a  hitch.  Does anyone know what the problem is here, and how I can fix it? Thanks Walkerma 16:40, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem may be with Google.  Perhaps they didn't index AlGaAs2 correctly, or perhaps they haven't indexed Wikipedia recently. (I think they index Wikipedia weekly.)  Also, I imagine that the list of inorganic compounds has a rather low page rank, because most all links are outbound.  If it is Google's problems, there's nothing we can do.  I hope that helps. ~K 17:08, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

text: It might be a problem with the indexing of formulae: have you tried searching for AlGaAs2? Physchim62 (talk) 09:34, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google question 

message: Hi folks,
Please see this discussion, scroll down to the end for my comments.  We need to coordinate biologically-related stuff with them, I think it should be very helpful- they could help with any our FACs, for example, by writing a bio section if relevant. Walkerma 17:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work with [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology|WP Mol & Cell Bio]] 

message: Hi all, it may be my monitor or it may be my anomalous trichromacy, but the pink didn't distinct much from the gray. So I took the liberty to edit it to orange. Is this too outrageous? If so, feel free to revert. If not, thanks. Wim van Dorst 23:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen these on many different monitors, and never had a problem - the grey and pink seemed very different to me.  However I don't mind orange at all, although you will see that the original colours have now been used in 1 or 2 other places such as here! Walkerma 06:42, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orange for {{tl|Chem Start}} 

message: I'm not sure if this is the right place for this question, but I'll ask it anyway... There is a Chloroacetic acid page and a Chloroacetic acids page.  There is however no Dichloroacetic acid page, it is just a redirect to Chloroacetic acids.  Chloroethanoic acid also redirects to chloroacetic acids.  I think that dichloroacetic acid, and trichloroacetic acid pages should be made, or the Chloroacetic acid page should be merged with the Chloroacetic acids.  Does anyone have any suggestion which to do, or disagree?  I posted here because I realsed that not many people are likely to read the talk pages of those tiny articles.  --PhiJ 12:45, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The only reason for this is that nobody had got round to writing articles about dichloroacetic acid and trichloroacetic acid: I've done that now, or at least started them. Physchim62 (talk) 14:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool.  I wasn't sure if the plural article was meant to be there to cover all three.  Thanks.--PhiJ 09:45, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, the plural article was there to cover them until someone got round to writing full articles about them! This trick is used quite often on articles about chemicals; we give a little bit of information until we format the whole lot. However, trichloroacetic acid definately deserves its own article, so I created it. As for dichloroacetic acid, it is less important but at least it the article answers one or two questions. Physchim62 (talk) 20:49, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Chloroacetic acids

message: I created a small article on 2-pyridone. I had a        do with it during my studies. I have no clue where it should be linked to. Maybe someone could give me a hint! Stone 16:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WOW. -- Boris 18:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks a lot, that's a very nice article!  (That's British English for "WOW", by the way!) I hope you will consider joining us on this project, and consider contributing more. We should consider adding this compound to our "other important compounds" list; the tautomerism in this compound and its relationship with DNA bases make it interesting in my book.  Students learning about heterocyclics are often puzzled why the pyridone form is even seen, since they know that phenol does not do the same thing to any extent, so I've often heard this compound discussed. Thanks, Walkerma 22:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

text: *It's upthere, with a B-Class classification. That's a good start, considering that most go the laborious way of Stub->Start->B-Class. Things that could improve it are information on Application and Manufacturing/Production. And a bit on safety if applicable would be nice too. That's all. Good work, Stone! ps. Care to join WP:Chem?? Highly recommended. Wim van Dorst 16:42, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks!! I hope to get it to A-Class some day! But to get it Featured_article would be great but with a chemical so boring like 2-pyridone (sorry my beloved 2-pyridone, I had you for 5 years) will be the hard way. I will try to contribute to projects where my help is needed.Stone 07:51, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2-Pyridone 

message: This is probably a typo for Abscisic Acid. Absciscic acid is not even a synonym of Abscisic Acid. This article needs to be deleted. -- Boris 15:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked to see if Chemical Abstracts has any mention of absciscic acid, and it doesn't.  So you're right, it's likely a typo.  I went ahead and redirected to abscisic acid.  Edgar181 15:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The redirect would be good if this is a synonym, since it is not this article should be deleted. -- Boris 15:46, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

text: No, a redirect is fine for a possible typing error as well. Physchim62 (talk) 19:52, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Absciscic acid|Abscis<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">c</span>ic acid]]?!?

message: Next project: benzoic acid
I started here User:Stone/Benzoic acid in the next days I want to replace the old page if everybody is OK with it. Stone 10:51, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what i'm talking about. I love the biology section. -- Boris 14:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: An excellent choice, and a good start so far. Thanks! Walkerma 02:32, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  benzoic acid 

message: Perhaps it is obvious to many, but I was pleasantly surprised to see another good chemistry subject as catalyst raney nickel to become featured article yesterday. Congratulation to all contributors, notably Rune Welsh. And of course it did it the honour we have (mistakenly) overlooked up to now: I listed it on the worklist. Wim van Dorst 20:41, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Raney nickel]] is Featured! 

message: Walkerma's COTM proposal over at the WP Chemistry has been met with silence.  I think it's an excellent idea, so I'm proposing it over here in the hopes that others will also be interested.  If others are interested I'll design the page and get the ball rolling.  Tell me what you think. ~K 04:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm still interested, BTW.  I note that Jay is too. Walkerma 05:29, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it's a great idea and I will participate. Edgar181 17:31, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collaboration of the month (COTM) 

message: Do we have an article for the "NIH-shift"? This reaction mechanism is used by Phenylalanine hydroxylase (PAH) and 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPD) and i want to upload some images. -- Boris 17:00, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NIH-shift

message: I think I am too stupid to join! With the asterix and four tildes at the edit page I get  only stupid stuff at the preview! To edit my name manualy into the list was an alternative I was afraid of. Stone 22:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  wanted to join 

message: Now I think it ready to present, but like all wikipedia article it is not ready. I would be really glade to get som sugestions for changes. Should the article be upgraded from start to the next level? Stone 13:34, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks I will work on it and I just downloaded some literature for the benzoic acid. 
To be faster than Walker seams impossible he is everywhere at the same time. (He has to have 5 heads and 10 arms!)Stone 11:10, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I think you seem to be the productive one, writing so many nice, detailed articles! I just have a big watchlist...... Please keep up the good work, Walkerma 05:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks! To be alittle adicted helps alot with the project.Stone 16:26, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think anyones addicted to Wikipedia. ;-) We can all stop anytime we want to.  Right... ~K 17:52, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Updating is still going on!
*Sorry but with Nostradamus this is only cited in two cites, so I will mention the names of the other discoverers also.   
*Use and production will be updated. Most of production ends as phenole, chloride and in the food. 
*Production numbers for the world have to be found, but I am after them. 
*pictures will be update when I am back to my computer at home.
To get the old books from 1556 till 1611 printed in London and Basel is more chalenging than Ithought.Stone 16:37, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  benzoic acid 

message: I believe Category:Uranium compounds would benefit from a review by someone from this project Ste. Anne 20:07, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the posting.  I took a quick look over it, adding a definition.  I moved URhGe over to its correct name and made uranium oxide into a disambiguation page.  Is there anything else you had in mind? I'm only an organic chemist so there's only so much I can see! Walkerma 05:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have issues with The Uranium trioxide entry. Specifically the section on UO3 gas. Something is fishy bout it but I don't have access to the papers quoted. I wonder if you could point a inorganic member of your group at it and see what they think. --Ste. Anne 10:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The uranium trioxide gas is very strange and the rest also. I will try to get a hand on a Gmelin and Ullmanns to get to know more. For now I changed the chemistry a little.Stone 12:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

text: A political agenda has infested UO3 related to a supposition that gaseous (!) UO3 contributes to Gulf War syndrome.--Smokefoot 14:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For those so disposed, the debate is here: Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Depleted uranium and related articles/UO3 vapor, the editor insisting on the existence of this gas is the subject of a RfA, details of which are here: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Depleted uranium and related articles. The other articles in Category:Uranium compounds are not part of this dispute but as mentioned above, could use a looking over by members of this group. --DV8 2XL 16:10, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I feel very sorry to interfere in an ongoing cruel war on the Golf War Syndrom. My personal opinion is that this syndrom had something to do with the war itself. The DU is one of the sources not used in former wars in this amount so it looks likely to investigate a littel more, but after reading some of the text it looks like sponsored research from both sides which makes it hard to get the NPOV out of it. And as the dispute in research is not over it is questionable to make up the same discussion here. The UO3 gas is highly questionable, the text looks like intrinsic stable vakuum experiment. With experiments like this presepitation to larger particles is excluded for the vacuum in which only a few UO3 fly around never hitting each other. But the formation of UO3 or U2O5 dust while burning DU is likely (ever seen Mg burning?) so the U03 dust in the air is not much less dangerous than the suggested gas. Stone 09:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Category:Uranium compounds

message: I put this second table up in September to help make sense of the statistics we had then in the main status table - to allow us to see that some articles had gone from the list and some new ones were added, some were reduced from A-Class, etc.  It took a bit of time to compile, and I don't have time now to update it.  I propose that we just archive it in with the September discussion, unless someone else thinks it's important enough to maintain. Walkerma 06:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Changes in worklist status" table - archive? 

message: Someone moved 2-Bromo-1-chloropropane to the lower case title 2-bromo-1-chloropropane, which is contrary to naming conventions.  I tried clicking the "revert" link on the page move log, but kept getting timed out without the change taking effect.  Maybe it requires someone with administrative powers to do it.  Edgar181 18:01, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Moves like that can be reverted by any user, so I think it was just a database problem. In any case, I have moved it back to it's correct position. Physchim62 (talk) 21:54, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for taking care of it.  Edgar181 12:34, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2-Bromo-1-chloropropane page move 

message: What's the WE stance on this nomenclature issue?  If phosphane, how far does this go.  Is PH3 phosphane?  And is Ph3As, triphenylarsane?--Smokefoot 04:38, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, phosphine is one of our exceptions, noted as such at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (chemistry), given that so few people use the term phosphane. Ethylene oxide is another. Physchim62 (talk) 05:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Phosphine vs phosphane

message: What is the official name for this molecule, i.e. what should the article be titled?--Smokefoot 14:24, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: VOCl3

message: I recently made some contributions to articles about diisocyanates, including the one with the title 4,4'-MDI. One action I took was to move this article to methylene diphenyl diisocyanate. My reasoning for this was that the article was about a compound existing as several isomers with very similar properties. The 4,4' isomer is the one of greatest interest, but also produced during its manufacture is a mixture rich in the 2,4' isomer, and a mixture of polyisocyanates, polymeric MDI. I believed the move also made the article consistent with the article on toluene diisocyanate, which exists as 2,4 and 2,6 isomers.
User:Wimvandorst has objected to this, stating that WikiProject Chemicals has agreed a principle of one article per compound. He has referred to me to previous discussion on the talk page . However, my understanding of this discussion is that no firm rule was established. In particular, isomers were considered on a case-by-case basis.
If the consensus view is that methylene diphenyl diisocyanate should be named after the 4,4' isomer, I believe the name should be methylene diphenyl 4,4'-diisocyanate. I believe 4,4'-MDI is not the right title because it is not consistent with the Wikipedia:Naming conventions, which state that acronyms should be avoided in titles. Alan Pascoe 23:37, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am a great supporter of the one article per compound rule, partly because it's hard to write a good chembox if there are three isomers!  However, this only applies when all isomers are worthy of an article.  For example in the archived discussion mentioned above, the group felt that 1,2-butadiene did not deserve its own article separate from 1,3-butadiene, so both are listed together at butadiene.  So the questions I have are: 
*Is 4,4'-MDI the only isomer that is widely used?  If not, are the 2,4' and 2,2' also widely used? Any others (after all one could in principle make 3,4' etc, but not so easily)?
*Are the various isomers always made as a mixture and separated, or are there different methods used for making each of them?
*Are the various isomers always used for the same thing (polyurethane), or are there significant secondary markets that differ for the various isomers (such as one being used to make a pharmaceutical, with another used to make an agrochemical - these are fictitious, for illustration only!).
If the overall view is that 4,4'-MDI dominates, and the 2,2' and 2,4' are only isomers that are always used in mixtures with the 4,4' or at least for a very similar purpose, then the article should be one single article IMHO.  I would support the status quo, where the article has the generic title but focusses mainly on the 4,4' isomer.  If, on the other hand there are significant uses of the other isomers that are different, or if the other isomers have significant production by other means, then a separate article is warranted.  See, for example phthalic acid - here the isomers are all major commodities, made by different methods and all with major uses and chemistry that are different, so we split the article into three separate isomer articles.  By the way, Alan, welcome to the project! Walkerma 05:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Methylene diphenyl diisocyanate 

message: There is progress in the worklist: compliments to Smokefoot, Alan, Martin and PC, and several other contributors. we have achieved another first: the section of Commodity Chemicals has risen well above Chem Stub articles. Anyone care to work up the pentane article for a second Stub-free section? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:12, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good news! OK, Wim, you've thrown down the gauntlet, why don't we make it an informal goal for the project to get pentane at least to B-Class over the next month or so? Wim, will you help? Cheers, Walkerma 05:08, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As the author of the new form chembox on pentane, I'll see if I can find anything else to improve it with :) Physchim62 (talk) 11:52, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  
One
Two sections in the [[wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals/Organization|worklist]] 
is
 are free of Stub level!!! 

message: I just uploaded a bunch of pictures to Commons for things like KOH, MgO etc. and thought I should mention a couple that don't have pages at present - caesium carbonate, and rhodium(II) acetate dimer.  I also added a sample pic to the (Ph3P)4Pd page.  I mention these because I was asked to add pictures of rare metal compounds - I took full advantage of a quiet, dry, sunny Saturday to do this. Cheers, Walkerma 04:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: :I would suggest that all members of this project Look at this Difference between revisions for the article Uranium trioxide and ask themself's if it is for nonsense like this that they contribute to  Wikipedia. This has nothing to do with NPOV or depleted uranium politics, or Gulf war syndrome, and everything to do with one idiot who knows nothing about chemistry inserting his crackpot ideas into this topic. He misquotes his sources and misinterprets their content to support his belief that 'clouds of toxic radioactive UO gas' are blowing about the Mid East.
:I have done my best to keep this editor at bay, and he is the subject of an ArbCom case, but his argument is that it is my word against his on this issue. I need some support, not at ArbCom, it's under control there, but in the Uranium trioxide article space itself. I have edit-warred over this too long now and I risk loosing my own credibility if I continue alone. --DV8 2XL 00:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Back again! And the gas is still coming up from UO3--Stone 16:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome to my world Stone, and thanks for the support. --DV8 2XL 17:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this what you want? 

message: Hello, if there are any SMILES experts in the house, I had a question for you at Talk:Polymethyl_methacrylate#SMILES correct?. Thanks and cheers, AxelBoldt 18:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have always used ChemDraw to generate SMILES too, and there are probably many dozens (hundreds?) of articles that have SMILES data that have this imprecise aromaticity-deficient information.  Clearly SMILES notations that include aromaticity are preferable to those that do not, but I guess the question at hand is: are aromaticity-deficient SMILES data acceptable or not? --Ed (Edgar181) 17:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And what about the SMILES produced by ACD/Chemsketch? Are those also aromaticity-deficient? -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 18:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Insofar as SMILES is a textual representation of a structural diagram, "aromatically deficient" smiles is as acceptable as a structural diagram of an aromatic compound showing alternating double bonds. Shimmin 19:46, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SMILES question 

message: User:Benjah-bmm27 has uploaded new images and has replaced the old ones - see :Special:Contributions/Benjah-bmm27, 19 March 2006. I left him a note. I think we should keep the old ones, for now. -- Boris 05:41, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have read the comments you have left for each other, and it looks like there is plenty of room to accommodate each other's concerns.  I think the content and style of Ben's new images are an improvement over the old images, but if they could be oriented as Boris suggests to keep them as "matched sets" with the 3D images, that would be even better. --Ed (Edgar181) 16:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The amino acid images

message: I tried to help but as long we have no Science peer review somebody else should also have a look. Improvment is the goal!--Stone 10:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Peer review#CS gas]]

message: We have Tungsten carbide on this list but the question is which one? Do we need WC or W2C?
: 22:52, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be WC, CAS [12070-12-1] according to the International Chemical Safety Card. Physchim62 (talk) 14:15, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tungsten carbide - which one? 

message: Smokefoot left a comment in an edit to the worklist on this.  I originally suggested DIAD because it is my impression that in the Mitsunobu reaction, DIAD has largely supplanted DEAD as the reagent of choice.  However I'm not an expert in this reaction, and I don't have any strong objection to DEAD being in the worklist instead.  Any comments from Mitsonobu experts? Walkerma 03:27, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you Martin.  We're about to undertake another phase of stub upgrades and I wanted to assign the specific species you, Wim, and co most recommend. We wouldnt know either. --Smokefoot 03:34, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why don't you assign both of them, and let your students find some references for us :) Physchim62 (talk) 14:19, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  DIAD vs DEAD 

message: Need somebody recalculating a number!
Depleted uranium and uranium trioxide are the area where a dispute is running wilde.
Uranium oxide was detected to have a vapour pressure of 107- at at 1500K or so (also giving a log p to 1/T plot from 1700 to 1000K). 
The fellow wikipedian now states that there must be plenty of uranium trioxide arround at room temperature. 
With the ideal gas law I tried to calculate the numbers of molecules in one cubic meter at standart conditions. This is only a good guess I know. 
Now I need somebody to take a look and state that this is more or less right or total bullshit at all.
Look at Ackermann equation in the talk:uranium trioxide and state support or other there!
Thanks for your help!--Stone 07:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  UO3 gas - need help

message: Dialuminum dicarbide. -- Boris 00:59, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps it only exists on a computational chemist's computer.  If it really is an isolable compound, I would at least expect it to be symmetrical (H2AlCCAlH2). --Ed (Edgar181) 11:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, i thought about that too. -- Boris 08:56, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: How is this structure posible?!?

message: Hi all.  I've just posted a question at talk:ascorbic acid about decomposition of ascorbic acid (I'm studying chemistry at senior secondary level) — I don't know who watches that page, so I hope no-one minds if I draw some expert attention by posting here?  (This might or might not imply potential edits to that article, but I don't know anything about the topic.)  Thanks all, Neonumbers 10:18, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decomposition of ascorbic acid 

message: Soon after I encountered the strangeness of the UO3 article, I chose to discontinue editing, hoping that the conventional inorganic chemistry perspective would prevail.  Instead the problems have metastasized.  The report is presently a forum for a sort of conspiracy theory, for lack of a better term.  Is it not possible for our article assessment people to place a notice on this article that its reliability is disputed?--Smokefoot 23:42, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like the revert war is still going on, and it was back to normal chemistry when I last checked, with the comment, "Wikipedia isn't a soapbox."  We had a similar thing a year ago, see Talk:Methylsulfonylmethane, it finally got resolved with a peer review.  Try to remember that we have about 3000 compounds covered where there is no controversy.  Let's work on those! Walkerma 01:27, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bringing trolls and cranks under control is the duty of the whole community. "Let's stick our head in the sand and hope this passes," puts a huge burden on those of us that care enough to maintain the integrity of Wikipedia, when half a dozen editors reverting this nonsense, like they would schoolboy smut if they found it in the same article, would drive these cranks away. In the article in question we have been treated to the spectacle of several knowledgeable chemist dancing to the tune of one editor who has by his edits and statements and questions demonstrated that he knows nothing of chemistry beyond what he has synthesized in his own deluded mind, and even their efforts are being typified here as a 'revert war'. You owe the folks that are holding the line a little better than that. I'm out of this fight now, but please support members of your own group that are still working there. --DV8 2XL 02:11, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Sorry, you're right, I didn't mean to imply we should ignore this.  We do need to stop crank science or it will destroy the integrity of Wikipedia.  I've mostly stayed out of the controversy only because it's not my area of expertise.  I was simply trying to reduce wikistress, sorry if I implied otherwise.  Walkerma 02:27, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Uranium trioxide Hi-jacking

message: Please forgive a newbie luddite. 
There is a picture in the "lysine" page that incorrectly lists the one letter code for lysine as L, not K (K is the correct letter.)
I thought the picture might be suggesting that the image is of an L amino acid, as in levorotary as opposed to dextrorotary, but a similar picture for isoleucine has an I in the same position. 
The abbreviations sections has the correct letter, the error is in the picture in the lower left picture "Lys-stick.png" and was added on july 23rd 2005. I don't think the image can be corrected with a simple text edit and I don't know how to leave an explanation for removing the picture. 
Thanks. -ben
:Good call, Ben. You leave your explanation in the small "edit summary" text box that is just above the "Save page", "Show preview" and "Show changes" buttons. I suggest that you remove the image of the article yourself. -- Boris 03:12, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've edited the image in question in Photoshop.  It now has K instead of L.  Cheers guys. --Ben Mills 11:02, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lysine is K not L

message: May I promote the use of the InChI as a powerful means of indexing all molecules with connection tables (all organic and many organometallic). InChI is a unique identifier, generated automatically (see InChI for links to open web services). We have shown it is indexed by Google and other search engines and so including it in WP will allow search engines to index these pages reliably and automatically. If InChI is added to the WP template it should be easy to add it for most compounds.
Petermr 12:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I'd never heard of this a year ago, but I think it is probably growing in importance, particularly as PubChem is using InChI.  I'm thinking we should probably include it in our chembox, what do others think? Walkerma 00:50, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Included. I don't like the "Database data" heading but i couldn't come up with anything better. Any ideas? -- Boris 01:47, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The InChI on the formylmethionine page seems to be incorrect. InChIs need to begin with "InChI=". See the InChI page for example. --Baoilleach 17:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I see that the Formylmethionine (data page) has been updated but I still do not think this is correct. You need to be able to specify "The InChI is InChI=12/32/23/4/etc" as on Borneol. The problem is that the template used on Formylmethionine (data page) does not allow the presence of an 'equals' in the InChI value. --Baoilleach 14:21, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Indeed I keep hearing more and more about InChi, and less and less about Smiles. Inclusion in the Chembox may well be reasonable nowadays. But to prevent table creep, I would then like to swap it for Smiles and not adding it on . Wim van Dorst (Talk) 19:25, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  InChI 

message: What shall i put in the "Chemical properties" section of . I'm thinking about pK, pI, number of H-bonds (as donor and acceptor), tautomers. What else? - Boris 04:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest taking a look at :Template:Chembox supplement.  Beyond that, things like H-bonds and tautomers may only apply in some cases (esp. the tautomers), but we could leave an option for those things.  We have pKa in the main table. Walkerma 05:59, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I got all this in the table, for obvious reasons i decided not to include "bond length", "bond angle" and "bond strength". -- Boris 10:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Chemical properties

message: Hi! I'm new to WP (I've been a wikiuser for quite a long time, but I just started writing articles last week). I created the Bromocresol green (as a side-need for the isosbestic point article I corrected). I wondered if someone could take a look at it and see if I'm going in the right direction (and also, as English is not my mother tongue, I'm a little prone to making mistakes, so if find anything wrong there, I'd appreciate a correction... ).
If you think I could be of help in WP:Chem just let me know, I'd be glad to join you.--Nevermore78 01:19, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good job, man, for a "newbie" you have created a very good stub. You more than welcome to join the project. -- Boris 03:02, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, I would call that a "Start", not a Stub. To go further, it would need information on its synthesis and on the reasons why it is used in preference to other dyes: still, the most important info is there, and that is what is most important! Physchim62 (talk) 13:05, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

text: One more thing.  shows a slightly different structure than the one you have drawn and i preffer theirs b/c it eases the steric hindrance of the three rings which would be quite big if they lie in the same plane as yours drawing suggests, or you have a good explanation for it (such as - the plane is not flat as it would normally be but it is very deformed and twisted) that you might want to put in the article. -- Boris 02:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bromocresol green 

message: I think we should color them, it makes the diagrams look better. I have created this "Chemical elements coloring scheme" (it is based on PyMol), which uses the "rgb"-system (stands for "red green blue") - giving the "rgb"-values is one of the ways to color HTML content by using "<tag_name style="backgroundcolor/border-color/color/etc: rgb(xxx,yyy,zzz);">some_text</tag_name> - and i need your opinion. -- Boris 03:02, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a good idea - where would this be implimented, things like chemical formulas and such? Ryan Jones 10:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It can be used when we draw images (see Bromodifluoroacetylchloride) or for styling the text (see in the same article the "Chemical formula" in the infobox). -- Boris 04:37, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Mmmm, how about - Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals/Elements coloring scheme? This way we know it is part of the project, but then it will have its own page that we can edit independently. Do we have a "template" administrator in the project, and if we do could those of you who are put it in the "Participants" table? How about "image" and "article" administrators? -- Boris 04:37, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

text: As an outsider, I think the color scheme is a great idea! I took the liberty of implementing the suggested move. Please feel free to rename or move the page as appropriate. — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:52, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not convinced at all. Where should we be using thes colors? If it is to be in molecular model diagrams, we will still be restrained by the software that each individual editor uses. If it is to be in reaction schemes, do not forget that one often has to "change" the color of an atom to indicate where it comes from or where it ends up. My solution for images is that we accept the best that we can find (freely): if anyone wants to try to do better, they're welcome! Physchim62 (talk) 15:40, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

text: To be honest, I quite dislike the coloring scheme used in molecular formulas and diagrams. It's OK if its used in 3D models, as it adds information, but it doesn't seem to help in the reading of standard formulas (I perceive it more like a distraction). 
Does anyone agree? Or is it just me? --Nevermore78 16:52, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am OK with allowing it in formulae, but I agree with PC and Nevermore78 that in general color to indicate element type is redundant in formulae.  I use color a lot in the (organic) classroom, and I invariably use it for things like "green for nucleophile, red for leaving group" or "red product forms from attack at alpha-position, green product forms from attack at gamma" etc.  There is a tradition (from Woodward) of colouring the electron flow in mechanisms, and often we want to colour reacting atoms, as in the intro to Wittig reaction.  Also see the excellent use of colour in V8rik's taxol image to indicate what pieces were used in the total synthesis.  For 3D pictures and Jmol (when that comes), colour is essential, maybe we should see if there is some way to standardise on colour settings for those. The colours suggested here seem to be very good choice.  Walkerma 17:30, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Alright, i guess i didn't specify what exactly the use of this scheme should be - in the infoboxes for the images of the structures and the chemical formulas, plus it could be used when showing structure images of proteins and other biological macromolecules, many of which are in complex with metal ions or other small molecules, so this goes beyond the WP:Chemicals as this project does not deal with them - although strictly speaking proteins and the others are chemical compounds too. Now if some of you want to use a different scheme for the reactions or the oprigin of the parts of the molecule go for it, in some of the images i have created i have done that and it makes sence as it offers different kind of information (:Image:TCA reactions.png, :Image:Nucleotides syn2.png, etc), but it'll be good if we set coloring rules for the reaction mechanisms, biochemical pathways, etc. -- Boris 03:20, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see my proposal for a workgroup below. Walkerma 05:28, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Colors of the atoms

message: Need urgent help!! The Uranium is constantly flooded with UO3 gas! Cant revert it 3 time but somebody has to!--Stone 13:33, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This case is currently under arbitration: feel free to leave comments on the arbitration pages. Physchim62 (talk) 13:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uranium 

message: Several folks in the last few weeks have been adding external links to the chemical infobox, mainly with the CASREF template (though others are seen too).  The problem, as PC has pointed out (and others before that) is that this can cause problems when you come to print.  The external link is expanded to the full URL, and this causes the table to expand to most or all of the width of the page.  For this reason last year we established a policy not allowing external links in tables.  I realise that the they would be nice (indeed I tried adding them last year), but until we can find some way to prevent the table or the URL expanding we should refrain from using CASREF and other external links in tables. Walkerma 02:39, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links in tables 

message: As a follow-on from the above discussion on colours, I think that we will need to agree on all of the settings for drawings. However that is much too big to deal with here.  I have set up a temporary work-group to come up with an agreement on settings for structure drawings.  I would like to hold off on actual writing at this point until we have a "quorum" of 6 people, because I think we should accumulate a group, not just have our policy be based on a consensus of 2 or 3 people.  So, the workgroup is open to join, and Boris, I hope you'll be one of the first to sign up! Walkerma 05:32, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I added the category Category:Chemicalstructures to some pictures of the chemicals project. The variation is huhge and some are wikimedia or comons which will not show in this category!--Stone 11:49, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good job, Stone! --Siva1979Talk to me 20:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed workgroup on structure drawing 

message: Those who horror at table creep will be glad to see on the right the default version of the fully transcluded chembox; the two previous bugs have now been fixed, at the price of introducing a new bug over NFPA triangles. However, the table can be now used for any chemboxes which follow the old "simple" format, even before this final bug is sorted out. See  for the full list of possible parameters (not recommended for those of a faint heart or with a visceral hatred of table creep). Physchim62 (talk) 11:16, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you so much for working on that, PC!  Just one thing, if we use the table exactly as shown on the right, maybe we could add to the disclaimer, "Go and look it up yourself, you lazy....!"  A perfect solution to table creep! Thanks again, Walkerma 15:18, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table creep 

message: Is there currently a wikiproject to compile and organize named reactions? I've not seen one and I think it would be a worth while project. Jgassens 15:15, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been thinking of starting WikiProject Chemical Reactions for a while, but just don't have the energy right now.  You can help by filling in some entries from the page: List of organic reactions.  We have articles for about 1/3 of the entries, but most articles are rather short.  When you write an artice be sure to include at least a nice summary, reaction mechanism, and plenty of references. ~K 22:25, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh. I found a pretty good template Jgassens 19:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, although in our (proposed) goals we list general or major classes of reactions only (we had to start somewhere!), we also need to improve many of our reactions (both named and "unnamed").  I've been wondering if we need a WikiProject on Organic Chemistry to deal with things like that - it would oversee reactions, functional groups, concepts, total syntheses and any other topics related to organic chemistry, perhaps organic chemists too.  Like K, I don't have the energy/time to take the lead on another project, but if one were started I'd join - I do write some organic things already.  Walkerma 01:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Named reactions 

message: Take a look on the article and see that 2,4,6-Trichloroanisole is less chemical than expected (the table is new)! --Stone 17:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Chemistry and [[Oenology]]

message: I have constructed the Chemistry Collaboration of the Month page.  I have seen interest by at least 5 wikichemists, so that seemed enough to start this collaboration.  Now it's up to all of us to make this a success.  Please nominate and vote for our first Collaboration of the Month which will be decided on June 1st.
I'm always open to suggestions and help. ~K 18:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chemistry Collaboration of the Month is here! 

message: Dear chemists - is this thing a hoax? I won't check this page, so speak to me on my talk page, or better yet just edit the C2O article. Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 17:06, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear friend than look at C3O2, another of the famous suboxides of carbon. They appeare in flames and in Mass spectrometry sometime and have no importance for people outside chemistry.--Stone 18:10, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your help. If nobody asked the article would have stayed the way for ever. Now have a look at both articles and everything will be clear!--Stone 19:09, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, Stone. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 19:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[C2O]]

message: (diff) (hist) . . m Sodium benzoate; 05:24 . . MessedRobot (Talk | contribs) (substing chemical templates - see WP:SUBST using AWB)
I simply do not understand what the machine is doing and how to find out. Can anybod give me a link to a page where the substitution is described, please.--Stone 08:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly the bot shouldn't do that. The templates are on the WP:SUBST NOT list, and the #if statement mess is avoidable anyhow. Notifying the owner. Femto 11:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Changing formula

message: There's the  template being used by the Chemicals wikiproject alone, up to now. As one can see on the MathBot results page, it is now also being used by the Chemistry wikiproject. Is it important to make the distinction by using the  template instead? Proposal is to use only one chemistry template for all chemistry wikiprojects. Please comment all.
*Support. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the distinction Chemistry/Chemicals warranting a template of its own? 

message: Recently I've been discussing the need for a substance/chemical wiki that provides summary information for employers and medical personal - simple things such as the type of warnings that should be heeded, street slang for abused drugs, pictures of various substances, dangers of inhailation (general safety info) etc.
The project as it is being worked on is subwiki - although some information will be replicated in the wikipedia, it's easier for access to have a seperate site.  Let me know if you think this is a good idea. 20.133.0.14 12:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As you say, this will duplicate a lot of Wikipedia information, but since your aim is different so the content would probably be different, too.  How many compounds do you want to list?  Are you focussing on illicit drugs, or household chemicals, or industrial chemicals, or what? If you want to have more than a few dozen pages, it will be a lot of work - do you have a team of chemists available to write the material?   This project only reached "critical mass" about a year ago, so I know it's hard to get people.  You might also be interested in the other WikiProjects on Drugs, as well as Psychedelic Drugs. Walkerma 04:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chemical awareness 

message: Proposed by someone in the worklist. Should it be included? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Same user (User:Sarosh) worked on TMAH (as acronym for Tetramethylammonium hydroxide).  I would say, move it to 'requested pages' .. --Dirk Beetstra 21:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:   [[Tetramethylammonium hydroxide]] 

message: I was wondering, why don't we add structural formulas to the  template as an optional parameter?  I think it would be a great addition and programs such as ChemSketch (freeware) make it very fast and simple. —Mets501talk 03:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you thinking of including a comment that suggests the use of a structure, especially for organics?  We usually do include a structure for organics, but it's not explicitly mentioned - is this what you are referring to?  Your suggestion sounds reasonable to me.  You might also be interested in some of our recent discussions on structure drawing protocols, please join us!  Thanks, Walkerma 04:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the link! —Mets501talk 20:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

text: The optional parameter you are looking for is ImageFile: it can only be used in the main part of , not in the sections. There is also a second paraeter, ImageSize, for images where the 200px default is inappropriate. Physchim62 (talk) 06:54, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structural formulas 

message: I want to put a note here that someone requested a peer review for Alkane--Stone 06:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer review of [[Alkane]]

message: Hi all, the  priopionic acid article was recently delisted from the Good Article list, for reason of lacking references. Indeed there aren't any, only external links. But for A-Class this is also a requirement. Should we downgrade it to B-Class then? Or can somebody quickly add some useful references. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Downgrading [[Propionic acid]] 

message: The change in the Glycine article made me think. The chemical properties lis was mostly moved to the Glycine (data page) page. I liked it to have the list with the usefull informations in the article, but also a full data pages has advantages. So we should have an areement what the pages should look like! --Stone 12:13, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My preference would be to have a little more data on the front page (common synonyms, abbreviations, CAS number) than what currently exists at glycine.  If the infobox is not large relative to the amount of article text, there shouldn't be a need to move data to a separate data page.  Although, I really like the layout of the amino acid data pages. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not at all the way the data page was supposed to work! It was supposed to be an overflow because the old standard template was getting to be half a mile long.  Take a look at toluene, that represents the way the system was supposed to work.  I think this was someone's test of a new format for the data page that got forgotten about halfway through.  I really like the format of the data page, and indeed I would support making something like this standard for data pages, but I agree strongly that the main information should be right there on the main page, in a full-sized chembox.  Can someone who isn't sinking in a sea of Wikipedia 0.5 nominations (i.e., not me!) please fix this?  Thanks, Walkerma 16:56, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: After looking around a bit, I see that Boris has made similar changes to a bunch of the amino acid articles.  I've invited him here to comment. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:08, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Full infoboxes are cool (i'm not talking about the one i've created but in general), i love them, they provide very quick reference to the most important characteristics of the article's subject, but the big ones take too much text-space in the main article and i don't like that. Here on wiki, there are 3 things that:1. all chemicals have;2. have some meaning for both experts and regular readers (So doesn't)3. it is not a good idea to have them in the main page (most of SMILES and InChI are too long, and i don't like having those that are short and can fit into the table without stretching it and not having the long ones) and these are the name (sometimes the name can sit on 5-6 rows of text but it's the NAME), the chemical formula and the weight, so that's why i kept them and moved everything else in the "data page". Now if you really insist to have the abreviations and CAS (i'm not so convinced about the "common synonyms") go ahead,  can add them to the info box, when you call the template just insert the variables "abbreviations" and "CAS" and give them the values you want. I wanted to see how it would look and i chose the amino acids as a "test ground". I have also added in AminoAcids links to the data pages so now they are 1 click away. -- Boris 01:22, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  property list vs datapage 

message: Here is a simple template that adds a small note at the end of the article about what projects maintain it, its class, and also adds the article to that class category of the projects. Right now the tempalte can attach the article to 5 projects but this number can be easily increased. Here is how it works. -- Boris 18:49, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Per Wikipedia:Avoid self-references, I don't think this should go into the article space, but on the talk pages. Femto 15:04, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What part of it is the "self-reference" one? -- Boris 17:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

text: The WikiProjects and their talk pages are Wikipedia-related meta-information that is not part of the encyclopedic content. Femto 17:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, i can easily make two templates one for the "article" page that puts it into the article class categories of the projects, and another one for the "talk" page that says who's maintaining it and does not puts it into the categories the way the current  does. Althoug it is easier to have  all this done by single template, plus this way we'll have to make 50% less edits. -- Boris 18:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Wim, first the template i've created can be used by anyone not just WP:Chemistry. Second, as i said i don't like when talk pages get added into categories - it's dumb - and that's what  does when called from a talk page. And third, i'll change it so there will not be any references to the projects. But following you logic guys we have to clear all the stub and categories references b/c they are considerred "self-references" too. Funny, ain't it? -- Boris 06:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At WP:1.0 we are coordinating a lot of these types of templates, which all use the bot, see the eclectic index of subjects covered.  All of these projects put their templates and assessments on talk pages.  I agree with a lot of your sentiments, I would love to see something like your template discreetly on the page, but we have to work with Wikipedia policy, which says that this info goes on talk pages.  The idea of a multi-project template is very interesting, we are wrestling with similar issues at WP1.0.  Meanwhile, you should take a look at :Template:V0.5, which has some neat features.  Oleg is soon going to adapt the bot to read "Importance" as a parameter too, if needed, though in our area the importance is a pretty static thing over time (Will HCl become less important? I doubt it.).  Thanks, Boris! Walkerma 07:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Maintenance

message: I find there are two table in the topic for 'Amino Acid' some of which are redundant. After proofchecking I was wondering if we could merge data in the two tables into a unified table listing all the properties. For those requiring 'Yes' or 'No' could we use numeric of '1' or '0'. This will greatly enable custom programming for protein sequences.
72.75.0.83 13:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (moved new contribution to the bottom of the page. --Dirk Beetstra 17:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Need to combine the two 'property' tables in the "Amino Acid" topic

message: (the following request was copied from Portal talk:Science, I think it is more appropriate here --Dirk Beetstra 10:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dirk, I'm at a conference this week and it may be hard for me to do a lot, but please feel free to copy over things I've written on this topic to relevant pages (just say where you got them from) if this helps.  I'll try and give my 2 cents when I get a chance. Walkerma 16:25, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK Martin, thanks.  But for now I will redirect all people here where possible (I guess this is the right place for this discussion), and start to repair wrong links where 213.188.227.119 has shown there is a clear problem.  There is a truth in the remarks of 213.188.227.119, though I (almost totally) disagree with his reasoning.  For now I think the best thing would be to remove the header 'suppliers' and merge the links into 'external links' or even 'references', or to rename it to 'external links to suppliers'.  Moving to 'references' would be my option, it is why they were there in the first place.  But I will refrain from further answering and leave the discussion now to people who have not yet taken part in this discussion, I'd really like to hear more from others (the subject above is related).  --Dirk Beetstra 16:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikichem Supplier Links 

message: Jamesy (talk • contribs) adds links to http://www.pyrowiki.com, a site based on the Wikimedia software, but not part of Wikimedia.org. Is there consensus or support? Any reason why it shouldn't be considered linkspam? Femto 13:28, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think any link that points just to the main page of that site needs to be removed (I've reverted a few of them, and I'll go back and help revert more if there is consensus to do so). If links can be provided to individual articles, though, that might be different.  For chemicals that have notable uses in pyrotechnics, I don't think it is inappropriate to link to a pyrowiki article specific to those uses. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: There is additional discussion here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:30, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  pyrowiki.com 

message: Hello
I am an active contributor to the Blueobelisk-project (blueobelisk.org). We are trying to gather free (as in GPL or FreeBSD-licence) data about the elements and already compiled a very big database of *verified* data (as in with scientific source). The data is available as CML-xml or plaintext.
Currently we are discussing a database of the 2d- and 3d- information about compounts. We compiled a database of about 230 molecules (mostly organic) in the CML-format.
We would love to share that data with the Wikipedia but need to discuss this with you, of course.  If some of your are interested in sharing data with us, please reply to this thread or contact me on cniehaus AT kde DOT org. Lumbar 19:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: wow, will investigate this! Lumbar 18:26, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia-data based on other resources (open xml-repository) 

message: This template uses a small skinny image (1X179px) to set the height of the image's td cell if the height of the image is too short (in case of Glycine's images the bigest height is the one of the middle image - 110px, still very short) or just for simple style purpose which is to make all the "image" cells have the same height. The width of the info box is 320px, so if you want to use the "height setter" (which is the default for the template), you have to make sure that the total width of the images is less than 315px for Opera and 317px for FF and NE otherwise these browsers will put the images on the top of each other. -- Boris 00:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Images in {{tl|OrganicBox small}}

message: Do we have an article about what "bridge" means in chemistry, and if we do, why is it missing from Bridge (disambiguation)? -- Boris 14:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did a small search (not thorough, maybe) on 'bridge chemistry', and could not find the term bridge as a page-name in chemistry, though I saw some pages where 'bridge' or 'ansa' was used (unlinked to a page, see e.g. Metallocene, Cyclodecapentaene).  May be a good page to set up.  In the meanwhile, I did find two 'chemical bridges' that were not placed on the bridge (disambiguation) page, I added these (i.e. Salt bridge and Salt bridge (protein), but I guess these are not the bridges you meant).  --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:07, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: created some links to (non existent) bridge (chemical), hope someone will pick it up.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:18, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bridge

message: I think that the images for the NFPA 704 diamonds should be deleted and replaced with the NFPA 704 template. They are simply a waste of memory and Wikipedia needs to be as fast as possible. Unless at least 3 people disagree with me in the next 7-10 days, I will be adding them to images for deletion. Using the template uses much less memory, which can be seen here:
Uses 3 images, takes up approx. 6,550 bytes.
Uses only 1 image, takes up much less.
--Evan Robidoux 15:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely disagree. Wikipedia is not short of 6K of memory, thank God! The server use involved in any change would be a little more significant, but still nothing more than we're used to. The SVG images seem to have a little teething trouble, but nothing that can't be fixed. Let's not change things just for the sake of changing them! Physchim62 (talk) 11:04, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Overruled. I have take it upon myself to remove all remaining transclusions of the old three-picture diamond template. --  Denelson83  08:22, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NFPA 704 Images Deletion 

message: Do they have their own peoject or place they visit where people can drop questions or ideas? -- Boris 06:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You can always try Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) which is where this kind of thing gets discussed. Physchim62 (talk) 12:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia Developers

message: Dear all,
There has been a dispute on several pages (mainly here) about the suppliers which appear on some chemical pages (basically, some people do believe that they do serve a purpose, but most agree that the choice of which is biased).  A solution has been raised (originally by the anonymous user that also started the discussion, User:213.188.227.119), being the creation of a page like the Special:Booksources page, linking to all possible external sources that have something to tell about chemicals.  Currently people are discussing if and how we could make such a page, I guess this is the right place to have the basis of this discussion.
What about the following solution (for front/search page and for the actual/result page):
=== Front page ===
Like the Special:Booksources page, but with more searchboxes, I would suggest to divide them into two, exact ones (InChI, CAS), and less exact ones (e.g. molecular formula, compound name).  Pressing the search button gives the actual page (next subject), with InChI and CAS resulting in effective URL's that really take you to the compound page whereever (the link will give you the exact compound when you search), for the other (less exact) ones the links will give you all compounds with the appropriate formula.
I know that linking to CAS has been disputed, I suggest for now we leave it in, it is easily removed if Wikipedia gets into 'trouble' with it.
=== The actual page ===
This one should have groups of links, having (where possible) deeplinks directly into the compound-page (can be accompanied with the home-page of the linked company).  On a chemical page one can directly link to this, like for a booksource Special:Booksources&isbn=3527281657 this could be Special:ChemicalSource&CAS=64-17-5, Special:ChemicalSource&InChI='1/C2H6O/c1-2-3/h3H,2H2,1H3' (both for ethanol) or Special:ChemicalSource&Formula='C2H6O' (the latter giving both ethanol and dimethylether).  Note that the external links do not have to give a result, many links on Special:Booksources&isbn=3527281657 do not give a result as well, some retailers don't sell this book, unfortunately you have to do some work to find a page that gives you results, sometimes.  So if a company does not sell ethanol, you will maybe get a '404' or something else.
A shortlist of external links, I guess it should be by subject, my suggestion:
* List of (URL's of) pages like ChemExper, NIST
** ChemExper
** NIST
** CAS
** AIST
* List of pages with MSDS
** Acros
** Aldrich
** Strem
** Alfa Aesar - now owns Avocado and Lancaster Synthesis
* List of pages with suppliers
** Acros
** Aldrich
** Strem
** Alfa Aesar
* List of pages with ...
(please expand this list (not the one just above this sentence), we can discuss the order of the groups later, I guess within the group links should be alphabetical order, or by ASCII-order) --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks great to me! I wouldn't know how to set it up, though.  Walkerma 16:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Me neither (that is, I can probably pick up how to write the php-script for it, but implementing ..).  I have been looking around on the developers forum, but it seems not too easy to get things hardcoded into Wikipedia, except when there is someone within chemistry who is already capable of doing that.  Where would be a good place to post a request to find a chemist that would have that capability (or does someone know someone who could help here)?  --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Getting a bit further, the page Special:Booksources has a master copy at Wikipedia:Book sources, that page contains a code 'MAGICNUMBER'.  The Special:Booksources loads the page Wikipedia:Book sources, replacing every occasion of MAGICNUMBER with the ISBN that it is fed.  So all we need is a 'copy' (or maybe .. more than one, depending how these things are coded) of Special:Booksources that does not load Book sources, but Wikipedia:Chemical sources (I have been so free to make a page that could contain the full list in time, please add things there). --Dirk Beetstra T C 22:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: We've got to get hold of a developer who implements us a SpecialChemicalsources.php similar to the existing SpecialBooksources.php which will get executed each time Special:Chemicalsources is accessed. (er, the php gets executed, not the developer... no idea where to find one either) It should be technically straightforward expanding it to replace several variables instead of one, then the page can be invoked like Special:ChemicalSources&CAS=64-17-5&InChI='1/C2H6O/c1-2-3/h3H,2H2,1H3'&Formula='C2H6O' and links can pick what data they need from a set of MAGICNUMBERCAS MAGICNUMBERINCHI MAGICNUMBERFORMULA. Femto 12:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I posted a message on Wikipedia Talk:ISBN, I hope one of the programmers of the ISBN pages is willing to help us.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have posted a patch to the Mediawiki site, proposing implementation of a Special:Chemicalsources page.  I have it running locally, works as a charm (and I already find it useful to myself).  The patch can be found here.  I hope it gets implemented soon.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:13, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ChemSources 

message: This one should have groups of links, having (where possible) deeplinks directly into the compound-page (can be accompanied with the home-page of the linked company).  On a chemical page one can directly link to this, like for a booksource Special:Booksources&isbn=3527281657 this could be Special:ChemicalSource&CAS=64-17-5, Special:ChemicalSource&InChI='1/C2H6O/c1-2-3/h3H,2H2,1H3' (both for ethanol) or Special:ChemicalSource&Formula='C2H6O' (the latter giving both ethanol and dimethylether).  Note that the external links do not have to give a result, many links on Special:Booksources&isbn=3527281657 do not give a result as well, some retailers don't sell this book, unfortunately you have to do some work to find a page that gives you results, sometimes.  So if a company does not sell ethanol, you will maybe get a '404' or something else.
A shortlist of external links, I guess it should be by subject, my suggestion:
* List of (URL's of) pages like ChemExper, NIST
** ChemExper
** NIST
** CAS
** AIST
* List of pages with MSDS
** Acros
** Aldrich
** Strem
** Alfa Aesar - now owns Avocado and Lancaster Synthesis
* List of pages with suppliers
** Acros
** Aldrich
** Strem
** Alfa Aesar
* List of pages with ...
(please expand this list (not the one just above this sentence), we can discuss the order of the groups later, I guess within the group links should be alphabetical order, or by ASCII-order) --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks great to me! I wouldn't know how to set it up, though.  Walkerma 16:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Me neither (that is, I can probably pick up how to write the php-script for it, but implementing ..).  I have been looking around on the developers forum, but it seems not too easy to get things hardcoded into Wikipedia, except when there is someone within chemistry who is already capable of doing that.  Where would be a good place to post a request to find a chemist that would have that capability (or does someone know someone who could help here)?  --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Getting a bit further, the page Special:Booksources has a master copy at Wikipedia:Book sources, that page contains a code 'MAGICNUMBER'.  The Special:Booksources loads the page Wikipedia:Book sources, replacing every occasion of MAGICNUMBER with the ISBN that it is fed.  So all we need is a 'copy' (or maybe .. more than one, depending how these things are coded) of Special:Booksources that does not load Book sources, but Wikipedia:Chemical sources (I have been so free to make a page that could contain the full list in time, please add things there). --Dirk Beetstra T C 22:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: We've got to get hold of a developer who implements us a SpecialChemicalsources.php similar to the existing SpecialBooksources.php which will get executed each time Special:Chemicalsources is accessed. (er, the php gets executed, not the developer... no idea where to find one either) It should be technically straightforward expanding it to replace several variables instead of one, then the page can be invoked like Special:ChemicalSources&CAS=64-17-5&InChI='1/C2H6O/c1-2-3/h3H,2H2,1H3'&Formula='C2H6O' and links can pick what data they need from a set of MAGICNUMBERCAS MAGICNUMBERINCHI MAGICNUMBERFORMULA. Femto 12:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I posted a message on Wikipedia Talk:ISBN, I hope one of the programmers of the ISBN pages is willing to help us.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have posted a patch to the Mediawiki site, proposing implementation of a Special:Chemicalsources page.  I have it running locally, works as a charm (and I already find it useful to myself).  The patch can be found here.  I hope it gets implemented soon.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:13, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The actual page 

message: Beclomethasone and Beclomethasone dipropionate are two different chemicals, that used to have their own pages (or at least i thought that the last one had its own and i hadn't payed any attention that it was actually a redirect to Beclometasone, no th. So this "Beclome{t/th}asone dipropionate" mess could be my fault). Now they have been merged again - i have separeted them once, but i'm not gonna do it again - i simply left a note on the last merger's talk page. Could any of you, and i'm talking about those who have already completed their chemical graduation, to find some time and explain to this "Organic chemistry expert" why these two need to stay on their own. -- Boris 02:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind - problem solved. -- Boris 00:36, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A little clash with the way the drugs are named

message: Hi, at the german Wikipdia, we just stumbled across this policies for the usage of CAS Numbers. According to section III.h one is only allowed to use 10.000 numbers for website without paying for them. Do you know anything about this and whether there could be any legal threats to Wikimedia concerning this policy? I mean, what happens, if the compund-database for en or de (or maybe all languages together?) exceeds this number. Thx for your help. --TaxmandeTalk (de) 22:23, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not a lawyer, but these policies appear to represent an agreement between the American Chemical Society and authorized users of the CAS database, which Wikimedia is not.  Wikimedia's use of intellectual property is governed by statutes, not by contracts. Shimmin 22:55, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would be suprised if CAS managed to argue that they have copyright of the CAS number of a compound: it seems to fall into the "pure scientific or mathematical information" exception to copyright (imagine if you could copyright the fact that the boiling point of water was 100 °C...). Collections of CAS numbers are subject to copyright under certain conditions, but we don't seem to be breaching this one either as we are not publishing long lists of numbers from external sources. Users in the European Union are subject to the EU Database Directive, but I don't see any individual user breaching that one either. Finally, I very rarely see CAS databases cited as the source of CAS numbers: we usually get them from Aldrich or NIST or WebElements, all of which have the advantage of being free! In short, I don't see any reson to worry about this, even when we exceed 10000 compounds: I expect en-wiki will reach this figure early next year, and we are probably about there already (10000 articles on chemical compounds) across  all languages. Physchim62 (talk) 11:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Among the relevant sections from the CAS policy statement are
These Policies apply to all forms of CAS information unless the licenses for CAS products provide otherwise. These Policies are subject to change at the discretion of CAS.
CAS information is copyrighted by the American Chemical Society (ACS). All rights reserved. CAS' mission is to be the world leader in disseminating chemical and related scientific information.
These Policies define appropriate and inappropriate uses of information and apply to all forms of distribution (printed, electronic, CD, and other media). These Policies are meant to be read in their entirety, not taken individually out of the context of the other points. Search results delivered in computer-readable form remain the property of CAS. Recipient shall obtain CAS' specific written permission for any uses of computer-readable search results other than those listed under Authorized Use of CAS Information.
These Policies apply to scientists, engineers, librarians, information professionals, and others working in their organization that either search and retrieve information or ultimately consume the information.
My own experience is that this policy is actively policed. CAS numbers are not facts in the same category as melting points and are copyrighted by CAS (they are also trademarked:
CASRN or CAS Registry Number®: a unique numerical identifier created and assigned to a chemical substance by CAS.
and
A User or Organization may include, without a license and without paying a fee, up to 10,000 CAS Registry Numbers or CASRNs in a catalog, website, or other product for which there is no charge. The following attribution should be referenced or appear with the use of each CASRN: CAS Registry Number® is a Registered Trademark of the American Chemical Society. CAS recommends the verification of the CASRNs through CAS Client ServicesSM.
It is clear that CAS claims copyright and trademark over the CAS numbers and IMO WP should be very careful not to violate this if it wishes to remain within "the law" (presumably US civil law). Note that CAS numbers cannot be verified without a license (almost certainly for money) and that one may not refer to the information gained in this way without an agreement with CAS. Although I do not know how CAS views volunteer non-profit organisations like WP it has taken strong political action against PubChem. If WP compiled a resource of the same size as PubChem then I suspect it could be seen as a threat by CAS. See, for example, http://www.infotoday.com/newsbreaks/nb050606-1.shtml
Petermr 18:05, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: CAS Information Usage Policy

message: Today, I've written a new article called Round-bottom flask.  A few Wikipedians have been under the impression that a Round-bottom flask is the same thing as a Florence flask.  I think this is a misconception, which has been in Wikipedia for some time now, and has been copied in Wikipedia mirror sites on the net.  I think these two flasks have similarities, but they are not the same thing.  An AOL search of images on the net of both "round-bottom flask" and "Florence flask" supports this difference.  I've corrected the Laboratory glassware article (which I've mostly written) and the Flask article to take both types of flasks into account.  I have Yet to be fixed is the "LaboratoryEquipment" template, which has an entry for "Florence flask" but not and now "Round-bottom flask".  Does anybody have any thoughts on the matter?  Does anybody want to fix the template?  H Padleckas 22:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Henry! Amazing that we didn't have an article on this before! Walkerma 04:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Round-bottom flask]] 

message: There might be a new featured article for our list. Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Ammonia
--Stone 09:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not yet! This neatly illustrates why I sometimes feel that putting articles up for FA status is a bloody waste of time... Physchim62 (talk) 14:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Ammonia]] 

message: Yes, I know. I volunteered I would fix up the chemistry section of Phosphoric acid a long time ago.  Well, I finally did it.  I expanded the chemistry section for orthophosphoric acid, combining the previous "Appearance" section and the "Chemical properties" section into a new "Orthophosphoric acid Chemistry" section right after the introductory section.  Also, I added a short "Phosphoric acid as a chemical/reagent" section and made some uses sections into subsections under it.  Does anybody care to review this new version or re-evaluate it from a start status?  H Padleckas 11:40, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Phosphoric acid]] expanded 

message: Hi all, as one of my other interests, I have contributed the Baden-Powell House article to the Scouting wikiproject, which has already reached A-Class status. Now I have put it up on WP:FAC, open for preferably positive comments. I know it has nothing to do with chemicals, but perhaps people who know me can show a bit of support? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:43, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In my other hobby, I have an article as FA candidate 

message: Google scolar, ISI and Google find nothing like that! Is it real or is it a miss spelling or what?--Stone 09:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No clue, gave it a wikipedia:chemical sources link, maybe more data turns up in time.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now its on for deletion.Stone 14:12, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Hyaline oxide]]

message: I think that we should add the periodic table to the bottom of all element pages.  What does everyone think?  It would be as follows:
:[Big table removed. Refer to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elements#Periodic Table.] Femto 10:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I should ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements, who look after these pages. I would think it is more important to have periodic tables on the articles which describe the properties of elements (see valency (chemistry) for an example). Physchim62 (talk) 18:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you're right, I posted it there. —Mets501 (talk) 01:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Periodic Table 

message: Titanic acid (talk) needs some context and clarification. Anybody know whether it's a real substance or a theoretical construct of geochemists? Femto 11:12, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Titanic acid 

message: I wonder if it would somehow be possible to establish a collective of wikipedians who are in the loop with their analytical chemistry? I've been having a quick look at some of the articles on analytical methods in chemistry and some of them are just plain baffling. For some reason the Combustion Analysis page redirects to the Combustion train article, surely, it should be the other way round because train method is just one combustion analysis method (dynamic flash, O2 by pyrolysis, etc). The spectrophotometry page seems to have been hijacked by physicists and mentions only UV-Vis and IR, while completely forgetting Fluorescence, Phosphorescence, IES (which we don't have a page for, although, I know it's more obscure) although some of that content is referenced on the Spectroscopy page. I know there are wikipedians out there who can help fix these articles but one has to wonder if they know they're needed?GreatMizuti 13:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm willing ot help but as is the case with many of these articles the knowledge required is very specialized to do a good job. There is a related project page you may be interested in at Wikipedia:WikiProject Spectroscopy. I have organized the spectroscopy articles on the talk page but need more input. Any mass spectrometry issues I can definately help with. Some spectroscopy issues I can help. General analytical too if I remember it.--Nick Y. 18:18, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Analytical Chemistry

message: I have now gone through many chemical substances (adding the :template:ChemicalSources to it, apparently 2325 pages), I decided to make a list available to everyone on Wikiproject:Chemicals/AlphabeticalList.  I guess all the compounds on this list can be described as 'defined' substances, they have either a CAS-number, or other unique identifiers (so no mixtures etc. I hope).  I will update this list regularly if there are new compounds available on this list (but feel free to add substances I missed).  I will now put some time in Wikipedia:Chemical sources, though not too much, since I am still looking for someone who can help me creating the code that will recognise CAS-numbers (and some other unique identifiers) on a page, and link them into a special page (working like Special:Booksources and .
If I know how the Chemical sources page is going to be coded, I will go on and put more time in that.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chemical Sources 

message: I would like to get rid of the future-product tag on Aluminium battery.  Can anyone find peer-reviewed references to aluminum cells, please? LossIsNotMore 18:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Aluminium battery]] 

message: See this. These templates allow easy entry of chemical formulas. Basically, you put . All of the parameters are optional (you do not have to type in atomic mass, for example), and the templates are easier to type in the the HTML code and give you a link to the element. Try using them (with full functionality, not just for the symbol, and you will probably find them useful typing in chem fromulas (I do). Polonium 01:52, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cheers, looks good! May I add a suggestion.  Now when one uses the template, it will make all the occurences of C in a page be a link to carbon, this is against the wikipedia regulations.  Would it be possible to code somethings like a 'nolink' parameter, that switches between a linked and not linked version?  By the way, I would love a  template, which would convert  into "" (in stead of having to type ), but that may be quite a difficult task (I don't know if templates can take string-handling and programming).  This is at least better than having to insert all the sub and /sub's.  Cheers again!  --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a nice template, but I've never been a fan of links to elements from formulae - partly for the reason Dirk mentions, but also because I think the example above should normally like to butane, not to carbon and hydrogen.  If you have a page like Baden-Powell House, you don't keep linking to brick!  I think the only appropriate place for such links is in the intro to the compound itself, on its own page: "Butane is a compound of carbon and hydrogen" of formula .  All other links from formulae should be to compounds, not elements: "burning to give CO2 and H2O."  If someone reading an article generally doesn't understand the formulae after the intro (except with obscure elements), the formulae are meaningless anyway. Walkerma 14:33, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Makes sense, I concur with Martin.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:58, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Utterly. We have an article chemical formula which explains what these symbols mean, I really do not see the need to link elements in formula except in exceptional cases (modified isotopes, maybe). I have been known to remove these links when I'm in a really bad mood, I do not wish to encourage them. Physchim62 (talk) 13:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, easily solved, make sure the result of the template is not a link, tadaa!  --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chemistry templates 

message: So far we have tended to steer clear of tagging or assessing elements, since they are considered the domain of the Elements WikiProject.  Since I am looking over these for Version 0.5, does anyone mind if I add in the  template and (if time) an assessment?  I will also contact Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elements. Walkerma 20:48, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagging elements with the template 

message: I know there may be some people who will wonder why in the world I would suggest this but I would really like to see a monoisotopic mass box below the molecular weight box. To clarify the difference the molecular weight is the average mass of the assembly of molecules found in a bottle of the pure substance based upon the normal distribution of isotopes locally here on earth. This is generally an innacurate number because isotopic distributions vary even locally due to isotope effects etc. (e.g. deep well water has a different actual MW than surface water due to 18O concentration differences). Additionally in a sample of water there are no molecules that actually weigh the MW (g/mol) in atomic mass units. So for weighing out a certian number of moles of a substance the molecular weight is best and generally we can not weigh accurately enough that the lack of accuracy in the MW matters. This is what many chemists use the MW for. When dealing with anything on the single molecule level or anything where the various isotopic species are dicernable it is totally useless. The monoisotopic mass at least is relevant and the most prominant species. It is more and more common today to deal with these situations. For those who think it might confuse the student's I would say that it will be educational for them to understand the difference. My main argument for inclusion however is that the monoisotopic mass is a fundamental property of the chemical whereas the molecular weight is a tool that is only relevant in unique situations such as if you happen to be on earth. (Ha, Ha)--Nick Y. 00:09, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can see why this appeals, but I think as a piece of information that people would want to look up I think it's limited. First, when doing chemistry in the lab it is of little value - my students always want the molar mass for their calculations.  Also, for a molecule like tri-n-Butylstannane, tin has ten common isotopes, carbon has two, even ignoring deuterium that would give 10 x (12 x 2) = 240 monoisotopic masses, of which at least 20 or so would be common.  If you want to add this into the compounds data pages for some compounds, though, I think that might be helpful for some simple molecules. Walkerma 01:01, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Always worth considering the contents of the ChemBox. But like Walkerma, I work in the real world (the earthly one that is) of mixed isotopes.  Also from the PR point of view, WE would lose credibility.  However, for those species that are popular for single molecule analysis, one could still insert such data in the "related compounds" slot.--Smokefoot 03:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Would it be worth considering to put in the 'main isotope'-MW .. that is, the peak that is 100% in a mass-spec?  By the way, I saw there is a ?  --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I guess I could have been more clear. I was simply suggesting more what Dirk Beetstra suggested. I was not suggesting an isotopic distribution of all possible isotopic combinations, simply the mass based on the most common isotopes (This actually differs from what Dirk Beetstra suggests). In other words C==12 always, H=1.0079 always etc. I know there are some ~50:50 isotopic ratios out there in which case you choose the lighter isotope. I know this isn't very useful to undergrads in a practical sense but it is very useful to chemists who always observe isotopes separately such as in spectroscopy and mass spectrometry. I think it is important for students to understand that isotopes are fully resolvable and do indeed have different behaviors and activities. One of the most important features of the MW is the number of significant figures. This comes directly from the variation in isotopic distributions found on earth not from inaccuracies in measruing any particular quantity. Different elements have greater variablity in their isotopic distributions than others.--Nick Y. 16:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Wouldn't a better approach be to place a simulated molecular ion cluster as an image in the article with a text explanation for those cases where such things are interesting (bromoform, for example, or choroform for that matter). With all respect, I cannot think of a single instance where I have wanted to know "hell, what is the monoisotopic mass of this molecule?", even having worked with labelled compounds... Physchim62 (talk) 13:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Addition to Info Box 

message: Caffeine is FA now!--Stone 13:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Caffeine

message: I am worried about the stereochemistry of the alcohol group - have added this to talk page - could someone have a look? Thanks. FWIW I blogged the value of WP in:
http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/murrayrust. Also I have reiterated the value of WP on the CHMINF-L list (see address in blog)
Petermr 17:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Coenzyme A

message: I've seen articles that have way less information than Bimatoprost yet they don't get tagged. I was going to but i decided not to be too sarcastic with that poor "random" fella Skapur who put the tags in there, so i'm just going to say - the infobox and the template at the end say quite a bit about Bimatoprost. Now if anyone feels that the article doesn't follow some standarts or lacks this and that, just put some effort to make it look better, don't just walk around like some supervisor putting annoying "banners" on the top of it literally (i moved those tags at the end so my eyes don't get itchy, but Beetstra had to put them back on top - good job), i have enough of them at work, but at least they pay there. Just my 5 "bitch" cents here. -- Boris 19:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is for the general public and it has to be accessible to the general public.   The only tagging I did was to mark it as uncategorized, which it was, marked it as a stub, which it was and marked it for wikification which it needed.  If templates are doing all the work, then there is no need for the article stub, jsut redirect the article to an article with a set of chemical diagrams of all the chemicals in the template!  All the other tagging was done by others. --- Skapur 19:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The purpose of marking the articles is to invite others to add and improve.  It is NOT an act of supervision but a request for help! --- Skapur 19:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed BorisTM, first of all, the tags are there for quite some time, and they have their reason.  I could live with the removal of the wikify-tag, which does not realy add, there is not much to wikify in the article, but the importance tag is there with the reason that the page does not state why it is important (why should people care about Bimatoprost?), and yes, it is a stub, there is just next-to-nothing in the article (it does not state much of properties, no importance, no uses).  And people add those tags because they don't have the knowledge to further improve the article, and hope that others will.  Apparently you use the page quite often (seen it makes your eyes itch), I have the feeling you know more about the compound, that you could share.  Oh, I moved them back to the top, sorry, policy-thing.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, i don't use it quite offen. -- Boris 10:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Often it seems that one article could be significantly improved (with content) for about the same energy requred to tag 10 articles, and the result would be more lasting and more beneficial to WE and its readership, it seems.--Smokefoot 20:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. -- Boris 10:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement tags

message: Recently  has been moving organic compound stubs into stub categories.  For the most part, this is a good thing.  But I've noticed that there are quite a few miscategorizations.  I've reverted a dozen or so, but I just wanted to ask everyone to keep an eye out so we can catch any other mistakes.  Thanks.  --Ed (Edgar181) 13:16, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New stub categories 

message: Template: has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.  Denelson83  08:18, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of Template:{{ucfirst:Nfpa }} 

message: FYI: There are a few chemical stubs are up for deletion.  See
Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2006_September_25#1-Methylindole.2C_2-Bromo-1-chloropropane_and_5-Methylindole Olin 15:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles for deletion 

message: Hi people!  Does anyone in the chemicals-department on wikipedia run an own wiki that is accessible from the outside world, or does someone have a wikipedia with a good handful of chemical compounds in there, where I could borrow a (small) data-dump from?  I would like to test some new extensions that I wrote (see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Chemistry here] and the core dev. are a bit busy.  It might need some extra tweaking, and I would like to have people to have a look at it, but I can't open my webserver to the outside world right now.  Cheers!  --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:45, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not ask the Jmol Wiki folks? They might be interested. --Bduke 13:38, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Did not know Jmol, but don't think it is the same.  I am doing this for the wikipedia (and well, others that might be interested, like Jmol).  --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:53, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a wiki set up on campus, using Wikimedia software, with limited password-only access.  I hope to open this up to the general public once it is fully set up (probably next year), but I'd be happy to let you use it, Dirk.  The wiki is at [www.wikichem.org www.wikichem.org], and I set it up to (a) create a chemistry community around specific topics, and (b) create educational material that does not fit into Wikipedia.  I'll let folks here know once it's open to all. Walkerma 16:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure if this will help, but you can also look at the wikipedia test site. Walkerma 17:08, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Re:testsite: there are some pages there already (water, silenafil and toluene), but the test.wikipedia.org is a server which runs a version just in front of the en.wikipedia.org.  I am trying to get things enabled there, now.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Someone running a local wikipedia? 

message: Water (data page) is currently unrated. I have recently expanded it by an order of magnitude. It certainly deserves at least "Start" rating, and in my opinion at least a B rating. Karlhahn 04:40, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks!  We certainly need to put in a lot of work on our data pages, these have all-too-often been neglected.  Walkerma 01:42, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I like option 2. Walkerma 20:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Water (data page) and worklist listing

message: I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that the articles for chemicals are named for the IUPAC prefered name. However, all the articles on hydrogencarbonates are called 'such-and-such' bicarbonate (Sodium bicarbonate, Ammonium bicarbonate, Calcium bicarbonate etc), despite the bi- nomenclature being obsolete. Are the bicarbonates exceptions (like Ethylene oxide), or should they be moved? Laïka 15:05, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know the policy here at wikipedia but I would assume that these are likely exceptions. These older names are still nearly universally used for these very common salts. Similar to the formates (e.g. sodium formate) and acetates they are just too common and ubiquitous to change name quickly.--Nick Y. 20:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Formate and acetate are easier because those are the preferred IUPAC names.  The bicarb example is more difficult to judge, I think, I could go along with either.  For our naming policies, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals/Style guidelines. Walkerma 21:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Regardless of what the policies are, a quick look at the organic compounds listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals/AlphabeticalList will show that most Wikipedia articles use non-IUPAC names. So the bicarbonate names aren't out of place.--Ed (Edgar181) 22:23, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: bicarbonate and other similar names are non-IUPAC because they cause problems in French (and possibly other languages as well) and IUPAC names should be simply translatable. Their use on English Wikipedia should be a question of consensus (they are, of course, very widely used). My vote is Keep, but I would like to see the comments of other chemists. Physchim62 (talk) 12:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep bicarbonates. In the english language it is near universally used. We shouldn't be a trend setter there.--Nick Y. 18:08, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Keep for now as deeply entrenched traditional names: in both the Aldrich and Acros catalogs, sodium bicarbonate is used as the keyword, with sodium hydrogen carbonate listed as a synonym. Shimmin 23:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming policies 

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.  B2T2 23:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory 

message: Hi all, someone on IRC #Wikimedia has given me an account to test/show the special:chemicalsources I have been programming in the last couple of weeks.  The site will be there for about a month.  I have installed my extensions there, could you please have a look:
* main page (don't ask about the URL, I don't know either).
The specialpage is called Special:Chemicalsources.  I also installed a tag 'chemform'.  Try to edit a page, and add <chemform>H2O</chemform> to it.  For more information, see here (also for options of the chemform tag).  I will be creating some pages in the next days on that site to show more functionality.
Please comment on my talkpage on the chemistry site, if there are enough positive comments, I will try again to bug Brion and Tim again to enable these on wikipedia as well.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Special:Chemicalsources 

message: Hi there. Apologies if this is in the wrong place, but I would like to request an image for a chemical article. I would like a molecular diagram for the chemical methylmercury, which I would also like to use on the Minamata disease page that I am working on. Unfortunately I'm unfamiliar with chemical image-producing software and therefore I'd like to ask somebody from the Chemicals WikiProject to assist. A 2D representation like that for methane (see right) would be perfect! I'd be most grateful if anyone could put it together for me. Bobo12345 12:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks very much! That's perfect! Many thanks. Bobo12345 23:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image request 

message: wikEd is a Wikipedia editing extension that has an integrated tool to wikify chemical formulas with one click:
Before                                	After
h2o                                   	H2O
C8H10N4O2                             	C8H10N4O2
2 Na+ + OH- + H2SO4 --> 2 H2O + Na2SO4	2Na+ + OH- +H2SO4 →2H2O +Na2SO4
Other features include:
• pasting formatted text, e.g. from MS-Word (including tables)
• converting the formatted text to wikicode
• wikicode syntax highlighting
• regular expression search and replace
• server-independent Show preview and Show changes
• fullscreen editing mode
• single-click fixing of common mistakes
• history for summary, search, and replace fields
• and much, much more.
For a full feature list and installation instructions see thewikEd homepage and thewikEd help page. wikEd worksonly for Mozilla Firefox and other Mozilla browsers and isinstalled simply by pasting a single line to your WikipediaUser:Username/monobook.js page.
Cacycle 16:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  wikEd formula formatter 

message: The article states that sodium or potasium iodide I- is used for the table salt. For Germany sodium or potassium iodate IO4- is used because it is not oxidized to iodine in acidic conditions in the stomach. Could somebody look at the incredient list of US table salt? I will ad the fluorination and folination of table salt in germany to the article.--Stone 13:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alimentary iodine is usually added as sodium or potassium iodate, that is IO3−, not periodate IO4− as you quote the formula. The problem with stocking iodide is aerial oxidation in the presence of water, if I remember correctly, rather than oxidation in the stomach (the quantities involved are so small as to make the risk of molecular iodine in the stomach negligeable). This also goes for "iodine tablets" which are stored in case of nuclear accidents. I will try to find some references for all this, promise! Physchim62 (talk) 15:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In the US, where I am in exile, they do indeed use potassium iodide; see this article, which includes the statement "The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approves both potassium iodide and cuprous iodide for use in table salt."  It goes on to explain that iodate is used in some other countries.  Also see this piece by a major US salt manufacturer.  I'll try to confirm this at home with our salt container. Walkerma 16:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Sorry you are right iodate IO3-! Typed 4 instead of 3! So I will introduce into the article that USA is the land where arial oxidation of I- does not happen, but we others have to eat iodate.--Stone 16:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the info and refs, Martin! This makes me wonder what the U.S. uses in its iodine tablets: anyone feel like a glance at the USP? Physchim62 (talk) 08:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Internet sells potassium iodide radiation pills!--Stone 15:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Iodide or Iodate in [[Edible salt]]

message: Hi there. One of my latest projects on Wikipedia involves the idea of merging the chemical templates like  and  into a single multipurpose template. As of the latest talk on Category_talk:Chemical_element_symbol_templates#Standard, the idea revolves around a single template  which would be used in the form  to produce the equivalent of , O2 (with of course, all the features that the templates currently in use have, not just the subscript elements after.). An option suggested by Polonium would allow for non-linking of the element if only the element's symbol is used, e.g.:  would produce O2 rather than O2. Since this proposal is so relevant to this project, if you have suggestions, requests, or comments, please send them to the talk at Category_talk:Chemical_element_symbol_templates#Standard. Thanks, Nihiltres 00:27, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this method seems even more roundabout than  tags. --Rifleman 82 10:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chemical templates 

message: Is up for AfD. I don't have much of an opinion either way, though here's a heads up. Femto 18:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of chemical compounds with unusual names]] 

message: Beginning cross-post.
:See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★TWO YEARS OF MESSEDROCKER★ 03:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stablepedia 

message: In Levinskii, Y.V. (1974) "p-versus-T Phase Diagram of the Uranium-Oxygen System" Atomic Energy 37(4):1075-6, as translated by Springer, there is a question about whether "UO3G" should actually be "UO3,G":
Please see this discussion for more information.
Does anyone have access to the original Russian journal Atomnaya Energiya?  Here is its editorial board if that helps any. Do any of your local libraries have volume 37 from 1974? If so, please post on Talk:Uranium trioxide whether the original Russian version has a comma on that top-left label or not.  Thank you. LossIsNotMore 23:16, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Atomnaya Energiya'' article from 1974? 

message: Dear all, a month ago I asked people to comment on the the implementation of a special:chemicalsources.  The page is running on this test site.  I still would like to hear if this finds consensus in implementation.  The mediawiki developers have, understandable, reservations on the implementation of this, but if there is a reasonable consensus from a group of wikipedia users I think they can be convinced.  If not, I think it is prudent to remove the  tags from the external links, or to rebuild the template in another way, since it is, actually, not an external link.  I hope to hear someting about this, soon.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Special:chemicalsources, [[:template:ChemicalSources]] and external links 

message: I thought it might be nice to do one of those templates for named reactions. 
However, sadly I don't know how to do it! 
Fields could include (please add/discuss other options) e.g.:
* Name of reaction: Stephen aldehyde synthesis
* Inventor(s): H. Stephen 
* Photo of inventor: 
* Primary reference: H. Stephen, J. Chem, Soc. 127, 1874 (1925) 
* Staring material: R-Nitriles
* Product: R-Aldehydes
* Similar reactions: 
Your thoughts please --Quantockgoblin 21:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Named reactions' Template 

message: Upgraded from stub to start might be even more! Have a look please.--Stone 09:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I gave it a class=start, importance=mid.  A bit more about why this chemical is interesting/important, and maybe some reactivity, and I guess it will be a B-class.  Good work, Stone!  --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Prismane]]

message: Ammonium lauryl sulfate, Americium(II) oxide, :Image:DNAbasePairing.jpg and :Image:DNAbasePairing.png, Sodium bicarbonate
*Wikipedia articles needing factual verification:
Methyl lithium, Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, Salicylaldoxime, Superoxide
Have a look--Stone 22:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: diputed or acuracy

message: There is a query at Talk:Sulfuric acid about the correct value for the first dissociation constant of sulfuric acid: does any want to join in? (preferably with figures) Physchim62 (talk) 23:54, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acidity of sulfuric acid 

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention.  Badbilltucker 17:38, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards