Talk:Copper(I) chloride

message: The article says  Avoid bringing CuCl into contact with alkynes.  Why? RJFJR 15:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I missed this till now.  It forms a copper(I) acetylide, and such things can be very explosive. Walkerma 03:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Precautions

message: This article has been reviewed as part of WikiProject Good Articles' Sweeps Review. As of September 23, 2007, this article continues to meet the GA criteria, and will continue to be listed. I made a few minor changes, mainly converting the citations to inline citation format. Cheers! Dr. Cash 18:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Sweeps Review

message: sir,
:can i know the structure of Cu2Cl2 ? Cuprous Chloride in dimeric form?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.248.80.57 (talk) 15:17, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Older books often talk about cuprous chloride as Cu2Cl2, but you don't see this any more.  I think you're right - it was seen as dimeric - but now I think that view is largely discredited, though that is merely my supposition.  Walkerma (talk) 02:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  A DOUBT 

message: I feel you have not bothered to do any literature survey at all on the topic. The comments I have included are based on long established properties of the material , not any recently discovered ones. I have included the reference to Dr Lucas' thesis because of his very wide ranging review of the properties of CuCl , as well as a broad literature review, not because of any cutting edge research he has done. May I suggest you look at it?
What you seem not to realize is that CuCl has encouraged very wide interest over many years for properties other than its merely chemical ones.
The lattice matching with silicon is important because it permits integration with the widely established low cost integrated circuit industry.
I hoped by inclusion of a short summary to stimulate general interest in a material with promise, and also give a short introduction as to why. 
Should you feel some abbreviation or alteration is necessary or useful, then fine, but it is a pity to shut the door on a whole interesting field, and not a narrow one as you claim.
:You do not understand the concept of generality.  Look at the references in the current article - they are largely to books, general sources.  Once CuCl becomes "integration with the widely established low cost integrated circuit industry." then the information is of general interest.  Otherwise good luck with publishing and patenting in the open literature, where ideas are vetted. If you have general sources to "long established properties" (your term) then describe those properties, citing the general sources.  And Wikipedia is not a forum to "stimulate general interest in a material with promise", unless that "interest" is so broad as to be notable.  Otherwise, as I said before, ten thousand scientists (me included) would submit lists about our favorite compounds to "stimulate interest".  Another way to think about the topic - if you do research on a compound, then you are probably too biased to write about that material very objectively.  The same idea applies to me too, all editors think that their compound is under-rated in novelty or is insufficiently noticed in our busy world.  This is the reason that I encourage you to demonstrate your breadth and write about another general topic.  If the semiconducting properties of CuCl become truly important, this area will be discussed by other authors because of the heavy, heavy weight of broad importance. --Smokefoot (talk) 11:43, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: To Smokefoot:

message: The November 1931 issue of Popular Science (p.23) mentions the use of copper chloride in identifying serial numbers that have been filed off of guns. I would love to add this information, but the article does not specify which copper chloride compound it is referring to (I or II). Would someone read the article and verify where to put it? Here is the Google book link: Popular Science (Nov 1931). Thanks.--Metron4 (talk) 05:04, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I would put that link into the forensics or a gun-related article.  A lot of various copper chlorides is used in the world, and I would doubt that this application rises above a very tiny niche (but fascinating) app.  --Smokefoot (talk) 05:20, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Usage in forensic science? 

message: Is there a citation somewhere for the safety diamond ratings? I'm reading the MSDS that's in the article but only find it as a "2" on the health rating.
--Diadophus (talk) 17:47, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  NFPA 704 Rating  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Copper(I) chloride. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080302034606/http://www.npi.gov.au:80/database/substance-info/profiles/27.html to http://www.npi.gov.au/database/substance-info/profiles/27.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:18, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The image with cyclooctadiene incorrectly shows CuCl2. Chemical Engineer (talk) 16:18, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like CuCl2 is reduced in situ by SO2 to generate (perhaps finely divided or solubilized form of) CuCl.  --Smokefoot (talk) 16:35, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong formula