Talk:Iodomethane

message: What's with the odd duplicaiton of numbers? --Belg4mit 02:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  references 

message: I propose we change the name of this article to methyl iodide, as this name gets more hits on google, google scholar, and google news. FWIW, in my undergraduate and graduate experience, methyl iodide was used for commonly by my professors and colleagues and text books than iodomethane.Yilloslime TC 17:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like all the halomethanes to have a consistent title, so if iodomethane is renamed to methyl iodide, then bromomethane should be methyl bromide, etc.  It doesn't make too much difference to me which way they are named, as long as it's consistent.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:53, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I think the same is true for MeBr and MeCl, i.e. that most people and sources call them methyl bromide/chloride, not bromo/chloro-methane. So IMHO those should be changed too. Not sure about MeF. And I'm not convinced that consistency is the be all and end all, anyway, but I guess that's moot b/c I think they all should be changed, based on there own merits. Yilloslime TC 20:06, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I support the renaming of this article as methyl iodide.  And the related compounds. My guess is that this change is noncontroversial.--Smokefoot (talk) 14:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright then. I'm gonna go for it. Yilloslime TC 18:57, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal: Change the name of this article to "Methyl iodide". 

message: I agree that if one lives in the American province of California, their recent regulations are of interest.  But my feeling is that Wikipedia should steer away from being US-centric.  Citing recent newspaper articles is probably too local and too newsy (also the articles failed the NPOV grounds, insinuating that the ruling was a bad idea (probably is in my mind, too)) That is what I though WP:NOTNEWS and WP:SECONDARY and other guidelines are about. Again, my heart goes out to those disappointed by the  local regulations, but we dont report on provincial regulations in other parts of the globe.  I thought that this is obvious, but other experienced editors seem to disagree, and I look forward to comments on why California rates so highly.
On the methylation business, I was thinking about moving most of the methylation content to Methylation.  Just a thought.  It seems that evaluating relative qualities of MeI vs MeCl vs Me2SO4 are more appropriate in an overview. --Smokefoot (talk) 18:39, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it's likely that this will become big news because California went through the  LBAM crisis just in the past couple of years which involved many state officials, lawsuits, national media, etc.  We will likely need to create a whole page on this issue along the same lines because even more people are already involved, not just in CA, but nationally. GreenIn2010 (talk) 20:01, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Methyl Iodide is an import laboratory reagent and it's chemistry is also interesting, mainly since it nicely illustrates nucleophilic substitution. But it's also a pesticide, and a highly controversial one at that, and that's not something we can ignore and still remain WP:NPOV. Do a google news archive search: most of the hits are about this controversy--we can't ignore that. We have plenty of articles on pesticides, and many articles on controversial ones like atrazine, endosulfan, and DDT. I don't see any justification for treating MeI differently. Though the article doesn't currently reflect it, the registration of MeI as a pesticide by the US EPA in 2007 was highly controversial, so this isn't something of California interest only. And, though the article doesn't reflect it, MeI was recently registered as a pesticide in Japan, Mexico, and several other countries, including if memory serves me--Australia. So this isn't just a US use only.I agree that the article could do a better job describing its pesticide use and the surrounding controversy--and to do it in a less California-centric manner--than in this version. But having said, I think this version is better than not having it discussed at all. I don't have a ton of time to put into WP these days as my contribution log attests, but I'll try to keep an eye this and clean it up a bit. Yilloslime TC 20:45, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 1. California news is not necessarily noteworthy news... and 2. methylation business 

message: "Neither the U.S. Department of Agriculture nor the U.S. EPA has measured detectable residues of methyl iodide or any other soil fumigant in the food supply or in fruit or produce grown in methyl iodide-treated soils.[citation needed]"
This line strongly implies (1) that the DoA and the EPA have actively been looking for the chemical and (2) the crops grown in methyl iodide-treated soils have entered to food supply.  Since they only start using this stuff 2 months ago I doubt that any crops grown in methyl iodide-treated soils have entered to food supply yet.  Can anyone verify this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdc204 (talk • contribs) 07:12, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking though the history I find that an anon made about a half a dozen edits, all unsourced, and the above was one of them.  The others are now gone as I just removed the last one. Gandydancer (talk) 17:53, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  none detected in food supply (unsourced)

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Methyl iodide. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20110726123944/http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/risk/mei/comments/panna_mei_attach1.pdf to http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/risk/mei/comments/panna_mei_attach1.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:29, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It seems that National Biochemicals Corp. copied this page for their product information guide.  I added the backwardcopy template to this talkpage, but as I have no knowledge on how to investigate this, I'll have to leave it to others.  68.48.110.17 (talk) 23:42, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article copied elsewhere 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Methyl iodide. 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  tag to http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Iodomethane-Approved-in-bw-422120383.html?x=0
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110814102050/http://ddr.nal.usda.gov/bitstream/10113/28473/1/IND44184498.pdf to http://ddr.nal.usda.gov/bitstream/10113/28473/1/IND44184498.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629133851/http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/84117_43.html to http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/84117_43.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) 04:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Methyl iodide. 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/20070210181503/http://www.muhlenberg.edu/depts/chemistry/chem201woh/1Hiodomethane.htm to http://www.muhlenberg.edu/depts/chemistry/chem201woh/1Hiodomethane.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:08, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Watching S01E03 of "Clarice" and the assassin kills the sniper in the interogation room by putting the poison "Methyl Iodide" in or on a can of soda.  Sniper takes a few sips of poisoned root beer, starts having convulsions, foaming at the mouth and flops down on the floor, dead.  An analysis of the soda reveals "Methyl Iodide" which they say in the show is used by pharmaceutical companies and as a pesticide.  So I'm thinking if it was that toxic, I would have heard about this poison before, came here, read the Article and while it's toxic, it's not THAT toxic.  A total of like 11 deaths and all of them industrial accidents.  But no "minimum dose" listed in the Article required to kill someone.  Curious what that might be.  Also if it has a flavor or a smell.  Yes I know it's a fictional show, but when you basically get lied to by the TV, it would be nice to come to Wikipedia to find out what the truth is.  It would "improve the Article".68.206.248.178 (talk) 06:14, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It can be surprisingly difficult to find such data and it's usually of a low quality (so a very rough number, but even then maybe a wrong one). It's not like you can just dose people with increasing amounts of the stuff to see when they drop dead, and 11 industrial accidents isn't much of a dataset either. The lowest lethal dose for rats is ~0.4% in air over 15 min period, but there are a lot of problems with just porting that number across to humans. Enough of it will be lethal, although I'd be surprised if it was fast acting (you usually have to heat it in the lab to get a good reaction). I wouldn't have thought it an assassins tool: too volatile to use as a contact poison and with a strong enough smell to make it noticeable in most food or drink, particularly as you might need to add quite a bit of it, and likely slow acting on top. --Project Osprey (talk) 09:17, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Used as a Poison by Assassins?