Talk:Alcohol (chemistry)/Archive 2

Inaccurate etymology
The Quran in verse 37:47 uses the word الغول = ALGhWL = al-ghawl — properly meaning "spirit" ("spiritual being") or "demon" — with the sense "the thing that gives the wine its headiness". The word al-ghawl also originated the English word "ghoul", and the name of the star Algol. This derivation would, of course, be consistent with the use of "spirit" or "spirit of wine" as synonymous of "alcohol" in most Western languages. (Incidentally, the etymology "alcohol" = "the devil" was used in the 1930s by the U.S. Temperance Movement for propaganda purposes.) Ryandward (talk) 16:39, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Inaccurate Production
"For instance the conversion of invertase to glucose and fructose" -- Invertase is not converted to glucose and fructose; it is an enzyme that catalyzes the hydrolysis (breakdown) of sucrose (table sugar) to glucose and fructose. "or the conversion of glucose to zymase and ethanol" -- Similarly, glucose is not converted to zymase and alcohol; Zymase is an enzyme complex that catalyzes the fermentation of glucose into ethanol and carbon dioxide —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rwr104 (talk • contribs) 07:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Inaccurate reference
[1] is referenced in the section "Nucleophilic substitution", in conjunction with the mentioning of thionyl chloride, but the reference is solely concerned with the toxicity of methanol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.238.197.249 (talk) 13:22, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Ethanol "is heavily controlled"
The article claimed that industrial-use ethanol "is heavily controlled". I know that this is true in the US, and perhaps in other countries. However in Brazil hydrated ethanol (96%) is available in any supermarket and widely used for house cleaning in spite of its (relatively moderate) fire hazards. It is also universally used to start charcoal fires for barbecues, as it does not leave a smell like kerosene does. It may be denatured but I doubt it. Anhydrous ethanol is not so common, but can be found in supermarkets now and then. (As a teenager I had a "chemistry lab" at home, and, ethanol was the most heavily used item after water. methinks the paranoia against ethanol in the US is a terrible act of violence against the kids' education, worse than Texas's ban on labware. Sigh...) --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 06:03, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Alcohol only for alkyls?
The article claimed that an alcohol is one OH group attached to an alkyl group. But could't it be an aryl or other groups? Aren't the phenols and ethenol alcohols too? --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 06:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * See IUPAC Gold Book definition. Phenols are traditionally not classed as alcohols; it's probably a rather arbitrary distinction (we don't distinguish ethers in the same way, for example), and I suspect it comes from the fact that simple phenols dissolve & deprotonate in NaOH but alcohols don't. Walkerma (talk) 21:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Octyldodecanol
Octyldodecanol is redirected here, but the article doesn't even mention it. A structural formula, at the very least, would be helpful. --Siden (talk) 13:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Origin of Alcohol not clearly mentioned
PLease refer to the following text, source the Qatar Foundation site "Arab Science- A journey of innovation"

"Although Al Kindi was drawn to multiple fields ranging from music to metaphysics, certain aspects of chemistry especially attracted him. Together with Jabir, he is credited with the discovery of ethanol and the isolation of alcohol, which as a disinfectant would become a mainstay of Arab medicine. But because he was especially interested in scents, he is also considered to be the father of the modern perfume industry. He created recipes for perfumes, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics. His Kitab Kimiya' al-'Itr (Book of the Chemistry of Perfume) is considered to be the first of its kind." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Imedbou (talk • contribs) 15:54, 18 June 2010 (UTC) Imedbou (talk) 16:09, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Alcohols table - misprint
Inositol is named also as "gexol", not "hexol". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esmu Igors (talk • contribs) 17:59, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually, there is a misprint in your misprint notice. Inositol is named also as "geksol" not "hexol" It warms my heart to see 2000+ hits in google for this non-word that appears to be the result of a speech-to-text processing, but this should be fixed! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.191.209.52 (talk) 06:05, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Inaccurate definition
In chemistry, an alcohol is any organic compound in which a hydroxyl functional group (-OH) is bound to a carbon atom, usually connected to other carbon or hydrogen atoms.

CH3COOH would fall under the alcohols category then. Yet it doesn't. 83.237.96.233 (talk) 08:40, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * You have a point. Alcohols contain OH that is bonded to C, but not a C that is a C=O. S  B Harris 03:33, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * the definition has been modified : carbon must be saturated. By the way, back in 2009 the definition was "In chemistry, an alcohol is any organic compound in which a hydroxyl group (-OH) is bound to a carbon atom of an alkyl or substituted alkyl group." We must be aware of article degradation V8rik (talk) 18:13, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * What about vinyl alcohol? No alkyl there. S  B Harris 18:53, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe not "saturated" but "having no other bonds with heteroatoms, except for another hydroxyl groups", as this definition could exclude from falling into the term compounds like imidic acids, for example. That sentence about another hydroxyls is intended to keep inside the alcohol class heminal diols (e. g., ninhydrin). --Esmu Igors (talk) 21:19, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Toxicity of alcohol
The section of toxicity of alcohol doesn't include much information on the toxicity of ethanol, likely the most common alcohol to be consumed. Although drunkenness is mentioned, perhaps a link to the page on Ethanol Metabolism, or the subsection of the page on Ethanol, Drug Effects. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.50.74.105 (talk) 03:30, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect naming of alcohol in list Alcohols
Under the IUPAC name, the name of propan-2-ol is written as isopropyl alcohol and common name as rubbing alcohol. Both rubbing alcohol and isopropyl alcohol and rubbing alcohols are common names.

Also the columns of IUPAC and common names of butanol (butyl alcohol) is incorrectly interchanged.

Also please note this fro article rubbing alcohol : The term "rubbing alcohol" has become a general non-specific term for either isopropyl alcohol (isopropanol) or ethyl alcohol (ethanol) rubbing-alcohol products. V ani s che nuTM 09:12, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 February 2012
Alcohols have applications in industry and science as reagents or solvents. Because of its low toxicity and ability to dissolve non-polar substances, ethanol can be used as a solvent in medical drugs, perfumes, and vegetable essences such as vanilla. In organic synthesis, alcohols serve as versatile intermediates.

74.76.14.138 (talk) 14:03, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

This is not worded well and is misleading. Ethanol is toxic, there is nothing low about it. The fact it is used in hand sanitizer is a testament to how effective it is as a killer of life. This should be reworded to something resembling "Because of it's relatively low toxicity compared with other alcohols and it's ability to dissolve non-polar substances, ethanol....."

Done Thanks, Celestra (talk) 17:16, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 9 March 2012
Alcohol is a socialy accepted drug in some areas

Thisischris737 (talk) 21:52, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. - this aspect is covered at the article Alcoholic beverage, and briefly mentioned at the "Applications" section of this article. If you want to add this text, please get consensus for the change first. Thank you. Begoon &thinsp; talk 00:55, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposal To Merge With Alcohol and cortisol
What do people think about including the information in the article Alcohol and cortisol in this article and then deleting it Alcohol and cortisol? Smd75jr (talk) 01:51, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * No, very bad idea. Alcohol and cortisol is long enough to stand alone, and per WP:SS should be a main article for an adrenal or cortisol effects subsection of Long term effects of alcohol which in turn is a subarticle for alcoholism which in turn is a subarticle for ethanol which is in turn a subarticle for alcohol. Don't put this stuff in HERE, which is a far too general article for it. This article is about the broad class of chemicals. S  B Harris 21:53, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree completely; I'm surprised it's even being considered. Alcohol and cortisol is a highly specialized subtopic that has no place in a general article on alcohol -- nor even in a general article on ethanol. Gould363 (talk) 03:31, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I also would oppose merging the two articles. The subjects discussed in this topic are too general; as previous commenters mention the cortisol-alcohol subject is too specialized. fvandrog (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:25, 2 March 2012 (UTC).

Inconsistent IUPAC naming for alcohols
There seems to be some inconsistency on what names we are supposed to be giving alcohols.

For example: 1-Propanol Its IUPAC name is propan-1-ol, which is listed on the page.

But, 2-Methyl-1-butanol Its IUPAC name is currently shown as 2-Methyl-1-butanol. Should that be changed to 2-Methylbutan-1-ol?

According to this Wikipedia page, the number should precede the -ol suffix.--Colintso (talk) 09:14, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I see no reason to keep the incorrect names, they will mean just as little to laymen and just as much to professionals, while having the advantage of being correct. They are probably only there as a product of habit.--Testem (talk) 07:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)


 * There are many, many pages with the non-IUPAC names and inconsistency due to the fact that there are countless numbers of compounds with the -ol, -diol, -thiol suffixes. Maybe we should be adding this to the WikiProject Chemistry list?--Colintso (talk) 08:15, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 April 2012
Under the heading 'Production', the industrial production of alcohol is discussed. The first star point refers to the 'conversion of glucose to zymase and ethanol'. I would contend that this is not correct. Zymase is the enzyme that converts glucose to ethanol. Perhaps the author meant to write 'conversion of glucose by zymase to ethanol' or perhaps 'conversion of glucose to carbon dioxide and ethanol'? talk 19:18, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Done and fixed. As you note, anything that ends with -ase is an enzyme, and is not a product. S  B Harris 00:47, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 11 August 2012
small request: The text accompanying the two picture at the top of the page indicate that the pictured molecules are "methanol" but this doesn't seem to be necessarily true of either of them. Probably a mistake.

130.56.86.21 (talk) 10:11, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * ❌ - please specify what you want it changed to, mon. Or are you saying the parenthetical should just be removed? -— Isarra ༆ 17:13, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I have removed the "(methanol)" in the captions, because neither molecule was clearly methanol, and certainly was not mean to be only methanol. "R" groups usually stand for a carbon-substituent, but they can also stand for hydrogens (in which case R's are simply generic hydrocarbon substituents). If all R's are H, it's methanol, but the point is that they could be anything. The image at the very top would be a skeleton model of methanol if we could see the ends of the skeleton legs, but we can't (they deliberately extend out of the frame). So this also could be methanol, but also could be any other alcohol (which is the point). S  B Harris 01:21, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Add to Applications
In section 4-Applications, there is surprisingly no mention of the currently prevalent use of ethanol, as the additive to gasoline for octane management. More corn is grown to be converted to ethanol for this purpose than for food we eat. That's all I know about it, someone else with knowledge of the previously used chemical in gasoline would best write this. Probably best just as added discussion under Fuel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adcva (talk • contribs) 13:42, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Etymology of "alcohol"
When tracking back the source of the word, the article states it comes "ultimately from the Arabic". But I believe the root source is Hebrew, from where it came to the Arabic. I don't have an encyclopedic reference for now, but these 2 known facts: 1. "kajal" appears in the Old Testament in the meaning of eyeliner. 2. the ancient Hebrew word for "blue", which is the color of the mentioned eyeliner, is "kajol".

Nash75 (talk) 17:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)Nash75 (17.3.2013)

"ultimately" in such statements is always relative. The word reached English via French and Latin, "ultimately" from the Arabic. This does not preclude that the Arabic word itself has a further history. Whether the Arabic word is a loan for the Hebrew would be more appropriately discussed at kohl (cosmetics), or else at wikt:كحل. Hebrew and Arabic are closely related, and the mere fact of the existence of a cognate in Hebrew does not mean Arabic loaned from the Hebrew, or vice versa, it is more likely just from Proto-Semitic. But the Hebrew cognate and the Proto-Semitic reconstruction might obviously be mentioned at wikt:ك ح ل. I fail to find Biblical Hebrew kajol (kagol?) "blue". The only word for "blue" I find is tĕkeleth. Also, for some reason, كحل doesn't seem to be in Lane. He sends you to the Supplement volume in 1.2594, and the relevant page there just mentions `ayn kahal "an eye that is black ... as though it had kuhl applied to it", but no actual entry for kuhl. So, I haven't been able to verify whether the Arabic word is considered a loan. --dab (𒁳) 10:02, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Right, I found the Hebrew word now, it's כחל. Gesenius doesn't seem to think there is any loan, it's just a Semitic cognate in both Hebrew and Arabic. --dab (𒁳) 10:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

R-OH: alcohol, or alcohol, phenol, enol, and alkynol
See this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alcohol&oldid=prev&diff=576355166

I understand that it's not quite technically correct, but is this level of detail needed for the first image in the article? Surely if we are to define it as a phenol as well as an alcohol then surely it should be defined as an alcohol, a phenol, an enol and even an alkynol? Testem (talk) 08:11, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * How about now? --Hiperfelix (talk) 17:47, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Confusing numbers under Applications > Alcoholic beverages
The first line under the heading Applications > Alcoholic beverages reads: "Alcoholic beverages, typically containing <1% to >50% ethanol by volume, have been produced and consumed by humans since pre-historic times.". The range '<1% to >50%' seems backwards, as that reads 'from less than 1 to greater than 50', which technically includes all numbers. I think it's supposed to be '>1% to <50%'. 174.108.32.250 (talk) 03:41, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I think it's supposed to suggest that the typical range is 1-50% but it can be outside of this. It should be clairified. Testem (talk) 10:24, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Clarified it. meteor_sandwich_yum (talk) 21:28, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 April 2014
Please remove the current hatnote and replace it with. I'm sure a lot of people come here looking for the beverages, and probably a lot more people come here for alcoholic beverages than for anything else on the disambiguation page.

2001:18E8:2:28CA:F000:0:0:4B89 (talk) 13:44, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ - The changes has been made. Thank you! Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  14:46, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

What is the deal with the caption under 2-Methyl-2-butanol?
That seems like a very... odd? claim. Or possibly like it is something that is only true if you are being to clever by half, the kind of thing where the punch line is something like "because you are dead" or similar. I'm not a chemist -- I just came her to verify a long off memory of the -OH group and alcohols. If it just lacks a citation because it is a kind of chemistry commonplace then the huh? factor should be explainable in the article. Otherwise it should probably go. I'd prefer the explanation if it IS true: it is the kind of unexpected detail that makes an encyclopedia of such value to the casual readers who are, (or ought to be) the primary target of an encyclopedia.

I'm talking about this caption, btw: "Ball-and-stick model of the 2-Methyl-2-butanol (2M2B) molecule, which is 20 times more intoxicating than ethanol and does not cause hangover" 2601:D:400:4A:CD23:8E65:4C08:DE15 (talk) 23:41, 15 April 2014 (UTC)james a
 * Agreed, that was clunky. I have adjusted the caption to have a consistent name and added relevant references. Testem (talk) 11:11, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

New subsection with improper citations moved here
The following subsection: (1) contains improperly formatted citations, (2) uses bare URLs to link to pubmed entries, and (3) those entries, once traced, are unacceptable primary sources, from old literature, and so constitute WP:OR in their selection and inclusion. Before reintroducing this text, first, find reputable secondary sources, to be sure the result you are presenting reflects the preponderance of scholarly scientific opinion (and not your opinion, as proof texted, by finding a stray primary source that agrees with you). Then, if you find such sources, two further steps: first, make sure that this is the right article, and the right place in the article to place the text (preferably, given the disruptive nature of your very aggressive editing, by raising the possible change here in Talk, before you add it); and second, by not making the edit until you have time to include a proper, full scientific citation for the secondary source (not a link to Pubmed, and NOT a bare URL). You are trying to run before you have learned to walk. Stop creating large tracts of poor text—poorly considered, poorly formatted, poorly copyedited, poorly cited. Have a more senior real-world colleague in the sciences review what you write, so you also can stop creating large blocks of text that demand English copyediting This is not good for WP: You are making messes, and not contributing as a solid editor.

Here is the text removed from the article, with its improper citations: "SECTION Human metabolites Studies have found trace quantities of endogenous alcohols of healthy volunteers from exhaled breath with a mean of 450 ppb methanol REF http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16705261 CLOSE REF and 244 ppb ethanol.REF http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16312013 CLOSE REF The mean endogenous methanol in humans of 0.45 g/d may be metabolized from pectin found in fruit; One kilos of apple produces up to 1.4 gram methanol.REF http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9267548 CLOSE REF However, methanol should never consumed on its own as it is poisonous to the central nervous system, and may cause blindness, coma, and death. These studies are not guidelines that consumption of alcohol found in alcoholic beverages are healthy."

See also notes from me and another editor in the Edit history at alcohol (drug), and at that Talk section. Your editing is becoming a pervasive problem, however well meaning. Slow down, do a little of high quality, not a lot of poor quality research, writing, citing, and placing. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 11:58, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 July 2014
The reference to al-Razi as the discoverer of alcohol is linked to an ambiguous wiki link. Instead, the reference should be the following: Muhammad ibn Zakariya al-Razi

64.253.151.172 (talk) 23:24, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done. Thanks for pointing that out! —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 00:07, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 August 2014
146.232.64.70 (talk) 08:16, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ". Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 09:25, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a change.

Spelling error
In the second paragraph, the word "referred" is misspelled as "refereed". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.16.12.115 (talk) 21:33, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I corrected the mistake. Dave Dial (talk) 00:25, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Edit request on 13 December 2014 wrong formula
ethanol is C(2)H(6)OH not 5
 * C2H5OH

105.155.157.49 (talk) 14:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

❌ - as our article on Ethanol explains:-
 * ''Its structural formula, is often abbreviated as , or EtOH.""

So,, or  but not  - Arjayay (talk) 16:02, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Toxicity section sourcing in a mess
…of web citations, primary sources, minor journals—completely awful state. I removed the two badly written opening paragraphs of the section, to here, for lack of citations, and poor quality of content and prose. The section can open without this material in it: ""Alcohol have been produced [sic.] as alcoholic beverages and consumed by humans since prehistoric times for a variety of hygienic, dietary, medicinal, religious, and recreational reasons.

Primary alcohols (R-CH2-OH) can be oxidized either to aldehydes (R-CHO) (e.g. acetaldehyde) or to carboxylic acids (R-CO2H), while the oxidation of secondary alcohols (R1R2CH-OH) normally terminates at the ketone (R1R2C=O) stage.[sic.] Tertiary alcohols (R1R2R3C-OH) are resistant to oxidation."

Someone with a commitment to this article needs to play close attention to what is going on here. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 12:29, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The section itself is also a mess. It seems like a sequence of unrelated remarks. There is no "red thread". 178.38.111.13 (talk) 08:59, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Table of names contradicts text and has ambiguities
C3H7OH	Isopropyl alcohol	Rubbing alcohol        -- According to the text, the IUPAC name should contain "Propanol"

C4H9OH	Butyl alcohol	        Butanol                      --Similar problem. Wrong order, according to the text.

178.38.79.250 (talk) 17:40, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Wording strange
"In alcohol cultures, the term alcohol originally referred to the primary alcohol ethyl alcohol (ethanol), the dominating alcohol in alcoholic beverages. However, since then, other alcohols have been identified, including the secondary alcohol isopropanol, and the tertiary alcohol tert-Amyl alcohol. Nowadays, the term alcohol in this context instead refers to the alcohol as a drug family (chemical class)."

Alcohol cultures  It is hard to understand this. Does it mean human societies where drinking occurs, or the fermentation process?

other alcohols have been identified Aren't there hundreds of alcohols in the chemistry sense, not just 2 or 3? Or are we still on drinkable beverages, and the two examples are two other chemicals with OH that contribute to drinkable alcohol?

the term alcohol in this context instead refers to the alcohol as a drug family (chemical class)  What context? The chemistry one? I wasn't aware that most alcohols in the chemical sense are in a drug family (meaning medicines, I guess).

84.226.161.234 (talk) 22:35, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * This all has now been fixed. 178.38.79.250 (talk) 17:58, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Translate the foreign words
''The 1657 Lexicon Chymicum by William Johnson glosses the word as antimonium sive stibium. By extension, the word came to refer to any fluid obtained by distillation, including "alcohol of wine," the distilled essence of wine. Libavius in Alchymia (1594) refers to vini alcohol vel vinum alcalisatum. Johnson (1657) glosses alcohol vini as quando omnis superfluitas vini a vino separatur, ita ut accensum ardeat donec totum consumatur, nihilque fæcum aut phlegmatis in fundo remaneat.''

Contains untranslated Latin. 178.38.79.250 (talk) 17:56, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Blimey. Anyone help?? DBaK (talk) 21:28, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 April 2015
alcho; dont have sequences

205.215.222.157 (talk) 13:18, 23 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  13:28, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Edit-request - Zymase
"Production - Biological routes" currently contains the following text: '''Ethanol is obtained by fermentation using glucose produced from sugar from the hydrolysis of starch, in the presence of yeast and temperature of less than 37 °C to produce ethanol. For instance, such a process might proceed by the conversion of sucrose by the enzyme invertase into glucose and fructose, then the conversion of glucose by the enzyme zymase into ethanol (and carbon dioxide). May I suggest removing the second sentence of this ("For instance..." onwards)? The reference to the conversion of glucose by the "enzyme zymase" is very misleading. Zymase is a historical term that hasn't been used in scientific literature for many decades. It referred to a very crude extract of yeast containing a large number of enzymes/proteins. It played a vital role in the history of science as its description was one of the nails in the coffin of vitalism, but it's wrong to imply that it is a single enzyme in the same way as invertase (yes, sorry, I'm putting that badly: of course there are multiple isoforms of invertase, but there are single enzymes that catalyse the invertase reaction; there is no single enzyme that converts glucose to ethanol). I know this sounds a bit trivial, but given that fermentation is one of the things that people learn in elementary biology at school, and given that they may see and learn the overall equation for anaerobic fermentation of glucose to ethanol and CO2, I'd hate a commonly-used and accessible resource like Wikipedia to misinform early-stage students about how this important process is catalyzed. The "Zymase" page is a bit weird, too, so if anyone follows the link, they won't be set right about the biology. Thanks! 149.155.219.44 (talk) 13:47, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Commas and extra space
There is a discussion at User talk:Whoop whoop pull up concerning the commas and extra space. Kendall-K1 (talk) 15:52, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Organization
The way this article is organized seems very odd to me. "Occurrence in nature" seems a strange subject to open with, I would expect to find it near or even within Production. It's also strange to find Toxicity so near the top, unless we think readers are going to come here first in the case of an alochol poisoning incident? The Toxicity section uses several terms that are not defined until the later Nomenclature section. The section order at Ethanol seems far more rational. Can we re-org to follow that model? Kendall-K1 (talk) 01:36, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

I re-arranged the article to match the order at Ethanol. Kendall-K1 (talk) 20:57, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Simple alcohols
"Simple alcohols" appears to be a completely undefined term.

I appreciate the forthrightness of this, but give us an idea, anyway. It must have a "fuzzy" meaning known to chemists, but not to the reader. Does it include the primary alcohols with unbranched alkane chain? A bit more? 178.38.79.250 (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I suspect it is fuzzy to chemists, too. Even more, I suspect that simple is fuzzy most of the time. Something is simple if it is simpler than whatever is under consideration. The smaller alcohols, and less branched ones, are simpler than the larger and more branched ones, but there is no sharp dividing line. Gah4 (talk) 20:11, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of links to Religious and Christian views of Alcohol
As the person who added the links, I felt that they added to the article with no lose. The reason for their rejection - that the 'article is about science' - seems to me to limit the natural usefulness of Wikipedia in allowing one to follow a line of thought across academic boundaries. Do you have a basis for this restriction - does it lay this down as a policy somewhere? Given that if I was looking for information about alcohol from an 'arts' perspective I would start by looking for 'alcohol', it seems to be a mistake to claim the article purely for the chemists. If you are serious about this, I feel you should create a disambiguation page for alcohol - separating out 'alcohol as a chemical' from 'alcohol in culture'. Ender&#39;s Shadow Snr (talk) 19:58, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't remove the links, but I agree they were not appropriate. "Alcohol" has a precise chemical meaning. It also is used to mean beverages containing ethanol. This article is about the former. There is a hatnote at the top of the article to guide people looking for the beverage. We also already have a disambiguation page, and the hatnote points there too. The "See also" section is for pages related to the subject of the article, not for links to guide people who have arrived at the wrong place. Kendall-K1 (talk) 22:44, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Good points well made! I stand corrected. Ender&#39;s Shadow Snr (talk) 00:29, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 December 2016
The following includes an error: "the Arabic definitive article" This should be "the Arabic definite article"

There is no such thing as a 'definitive article' in grammatical terms. MJ Kobernus (talk) 11:29, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ - thanks for pointing that out - Arjayay (talk) 11:33, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 December 2016
Remove the first sentence of the "Etymology" subsection as it is essentially the same as the second one. Remove "Ultimately" from second sentence of same paragraph. NicGastellu (talk) 09:50, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅! Thanks for pointing that out. regards, DRAGON BOOSTER   ★  11:50, 25 December 2016 (UTC).
 * Ok, but why did you remove the Arabic leaving only the transliteration? Kendall-K1 (talk) 13:32, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Edit request on 14 December 2016
According to the IUPAC Gold Book's entry on alcohols, the term hydroxyl refers to the radical species OH, while the a hydroxy group refers to the -OH group attached to a hydrocarbon chain. In the first line of this article hydroxyl functional group is written, should it not be hydroxy functional group, or am I mistaken?

Askemov (talk) 20:43, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I suspect you're right, but when I went to the article on Hydroxy group I found it such a contradictory mess that I was unable to learn anything from it. Kendall-K1 (talk) 22:30, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I agree with you there. Both the IUPAC guidance and even the Hydroxy group article seem pretty clear to me. I would agree that the mentions of hydroxyl in this article generally need changing to hydroxy. Testem (talk) 19:02, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hydroxy group has been cleaned up since I made that previous comment, after I appealed to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry for some expert help. Check out . Kendall-K1 (talk) 01:24, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, done in a day! So in light of that, would you agree it's appropriate to make the proposed changes to this article? Testem (talk) 14:50, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Wrong history about alcohol
Greeting. As you see on this page's link

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_ibn_Zakariya_al-Razi

Alcohol made by an Iranian named Muhammad ibn e sina zakariya e razi, absollutly he was Iranian, and alcohol is not Arabian actually its Persian (iranian) word. please correct where that you wrote arabic word. thank you very much. thank you very much. Arian Habibtaheri (talk) 02:19, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Wrong "Total recorded alcohol per capita consumption (15+), in litres of pure alcohol" picture
The picture is outdated (from 2004). Check some health organisation reports. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Len0bium (talk • contribs) 00:54, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Errors in Nucleophilic substitution sub-section
The article claims that "neutral alcohols do not react in such reactions" However an example of this would be the reaction of alcohols with phosphorus trihalides. Would it be ok to rewrite this section as well as delete it's broken references? EvilxFish (talk) 14:00, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Redundancy
I don't know how rational is your decision [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alcohol&type=revision&diff=802013318&oldid=801795218 to keep the full less common name] and its full text in another language, and in the Nastaliq style, in a sub-section that is in an article not about the man himself? Should we include the rest of his article in the alcohol article or what? It was clearly copied and pasted from the other article without the slightest effort to edit or rephrase in context. That's bad editing! --Mahmudmasri (talk) 14:29, 23 September 2017 (UTC)


 * First of all please read this, your sarcasm is not appreciated. Perhaps the Nastaliq style is not really appropriate as a formal text so I will agree we should leave it out however I do believe the full name should be included, especially given the very short nature of the section. Your thoughts to this? EvilxFish (talk) 17:59, 23 September 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm not qualified to say which bits of the name merit inclusion, but I don't think the shortness of the section should be taken as a reason to pad it out. Frankly, I think we might revert to this version - as far as I could see no-one except really cared that a little material under the section heading was only peripherally related to that section heading, and since they are currently sitting out their fourth block for edit warring we could put it back without some kind of endless tedious argument, thus solving the short-section problem.  Edit to add: perhaps the section title could then use some work, recognising that in this sort of context history and etymology are related. We might even just call it "History and Etymology" and have done with it. Pinkbeast (talk) 19:24, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alcohol. 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/20070919162404/http://www.cem.msu.edu/~reusch/VirtualText/alcohol1.htm to http://www.cem.msu.edu/~reusch/VirtualText/alcohol1.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) 10:43, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Reliability of sources
Please read this about what a reliable source is. I quote :
 * The word "source" when citing sources on Wikipedia has three related meanings:


 * The piece of work itself (the article, book)


 * The creator of the work (the writer, journalist)


 * The publisher of the work (for example, Random House or Cambridge University Press)


 * Any of the three can affect reliability. Reliable sources may be published materials with a reliable publication process, authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject, or both. These qualifications should be demonstrable to other people.

As you can see, the publisher is only one of the 3 factors defining a reliable source, therefore, an Oxford book written by a non historian author is not a reliable source for a historical claim. Best regards. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  19:19, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * This is a medical subject and it is not that complicated like you are thinking. What is George Curzon, 1st Marquess Curzon of Kedleston (non historian), Salim Al-Hassani (published article on a webpage), and others are doing on this same section? Dhavendra Kumar seems more reliable than those, having his book published by Oxford which is highly reliable. Overall, this information in question is too commonly known. See this, another reliable source which cites "Needham" (a historian) and gives lots of details. Harmanprtjhj (talk) 04:55, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Test for alcohol
Could some content of Victor Meyer and Lucas test be put into this article?

Also, Groove's process is missing, as is alcohol reaction with silver halides, and various other reactions. Viv73 (talk) 06:47, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

"Octyldodecanol" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Octyldodecanol. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. ChemNerd (talk) 17:25, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Other production methods
Obviously Grignard reaction starting with keton, ester or carbonate ester, or diester, can be used to create tertiary alcohols. It is pretty common method of producing specialized alcohols.

Separation from natural samples or semisynthesis from natural sources is also very common, i.e. for menthol from peppermint oil (by cooling and physical separation), or Borneol from camphor (by reduction of keton, i.e. using LiAlH4 or NaBH4 in diethyl ether or THF, usually producing isobornol with very specific stereochemistry]; or by using [[Meerwein–Ponndorf–Verley reduction). 2A02:168:2000:5B:BFF5:CA65:7F9E:4032 (talk) 19:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 May 2021
Propan-2-ol in the common name table should be changed to Propan-1-ol 118.139.121.5 (talk) 04:46, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Propan-2-ol is listed in the common name table as isopropyl or rubbing alcohol. That is correct. Is there something I'm missing? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:14, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Toxicity Section Misleading
The statements "With respect to acute toxicity, simple alcohols have low acute toxicities" and "Methanol and ethanol are less acutely toxic" seem to imply that these compounds are relatively safe. While being much less toxic than other compounds, they can still be lethal, particularly at the quantities ethanol is typically consumed in. Similarly, methanol is toxic at several times smaller amounts than ethanol, while the second statement seems to imply otherwise by pairing them together. A statement clarifying that they are less toxic than other compounds, but still dangerous, and that most are toxic at much lower levels than ethanol, would be appropriate to avoid misunderstanding. See below for an article discussing LD50 of methanol and typical amount needed to cause permanent blindness:

Crepuscular Scrawl (talk) 23:37, 25 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello ! Does Moon 2017 compare the toxicity of ethanol and methanol? If so, you could propose a new sentence here to replace the current Methanol and ethanol are less acutely toxic, and I will put it in the article. I will also need a page number. Thanks, ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 23:52, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Discrepancy between two pages
There appears to be a discrepancy between, at the very least, the chart of alcohols and the actual alcohols themselves. It lists the chemical formula for isopropyl alcohol as C3H7OH, whilst on the isopropyl alcohol page it lists it as C3H8O. Not sure which is right. Or I'm misunderstanding something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.229.144.181 (talk • contribs) 01:52, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * They are equivalent. Each indicates 3 carbons, 8 hydrogens and 1 oxygen.  They are just written out a little differently in each case.  C3H8O is a better, more standard convention though. ChemNerd (talk) 02:02, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * C3H8O could be 1-propanol, 2-propanol, or methyl ethyl ether. C3H7OH removes the third choice. Gah4 (talk) 15:50, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * C3H8O could be 1-propanol, 2-propanol, or methyl ethyl ether. C3H7OH removes the third choice. Gah4 (talk) 15:50, 28 December 2021 (UTC)