Talk:Glyoxal

Creating Page
I suggest a page should be created for dialdehydes. Nothing concerning aldehydes with two groups are mentioned in aldehydes. I think this would parallel with the page on diketones. -- Freiddie 13:10, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

German quotation
I have restored the quote for the preparation of glyoxal in its original language. The very tone is an echo from an era that has long passed, the language of today's journal articles is anemic compared to publications from a century ago. 128.226.130.90 (talk) 16:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I would insist that the German text is not appropriate. For one thing, the poetic(?) quality of the German quote cannot be appreciated by those readers who are not fluent in German; which means the vast majority of the readers, even if one considers only those who may be interested in glyoxal. For those readers, the German text is just distracting "noise" that interrupts the smooth reading of the paragraph. As for those readers who are fluent in German, one can presume that, if they are reading the English wikipedia, they can understand the English translation; so for them the German text is pretty much redundant. Finally, I would bet that any admirable qualities of the German text can be preserved and appreciated in a good translation thereof.  All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 21:36, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm. It depends what we want to illustrate. If we just want to discuss the preparation of monomeric glyoxal then we don't need any direct quotation from a paper, we just say that it is done by heating the hydrate with P2O5. However, if we want to discuss the practice of chemistry 100 years back we should also give the original article - the flavor of the language was different then. Why not relegate the things that are not directly relevant to the substance itself to a footnote? After all Wikipedia has been criticized for its anemic language. 128.226.130.90 (talk) 20:09, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that the German quote enhances the article and can be ignored by those focused on other aspects. Also, Jorge: insisting is not usually part of the vocabulary in Wikipedia. One might debate or urge or complain, but insist?  --Smokefoot (talk) 23:17, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, insisting in the Talk page is always better than just reverting other peopleś edits. 8-) Smokefoot, presumably you are fluent in German; I am not. To me (and, I suspect, to 90% of the readership), the German text is neither meaningful nor beautiful, just some noise that I must skip over. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 11:22, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Safety
I changed the safety info based on http://fscimage.fishersci.com/msds/01960.htm the previous info may have been for a dilute aqueous solution. Concentrated solutions are flammible. Rgbutler (talk) 19:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

chemistry
what is the structural formula of glyoxal 103.170.179.51 (talk) 10:51, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Wrong density
1.27 g/cm^3 is for 40% water solution. I believe pure compounds' density is 1.14 as — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.0.181.42 (talk) 17:31, 19 April 2022 (UTC)