Talk:Proflavine

Incorrect image
There is an error in the article "Proflavine." The structure is drawn incorrectly and currently represents a molecule with five bonds to a Carbon in four different places. The correct structure can be easily drawn by removing the two verticle double bonds in the center ring (leaving the single bonds). It is also a viable option to demonstrate resonance by simply drawing three circles in the middle of each ring instead of assigning the double bonds to specific locations.

Shalla Hanson 22:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC)Shalla Hanson


 * Reported to WikiProject Chemistry/Image Request. Thanks Shalla!  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 23:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Fixed --Rifleman 82 02:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation - uhh... what?
The article states that "proflavine" is pronounced "pro-fla¢vin". Excuse me? What does "pro-fla¢vin" correspond to? How is "¢" pronounced? Is that sign even supposed to be there? Someone needs to write the pronunciation in IPA. I cannot do it because the pronunciations I found are contradictory. For example, compare this video, this other video and what you hear if you enter it into Google Translate.

Devil Master (talk) 02:32, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

"Bate na bina"
In 23:04, 31 January 2015‎, the anonymous user 84.91.129.239 added "bate na bina" as proflavine alternative name. Sounds as a joke in portuguese language meaning "hit the caller ID identifier equipment". It sounds purely vandalization. There is any source of "bate na bina" as alternative name for Proflavine? There are multiple pages on the web reproducing this information, but the source is Wikipedia (as it is there for almost 5 yr).

Douglas Adamoski, 1 august 2019

Molar extinction coefficient
Last paragraph, at the time of posting, includes: "Proflavine absorbs strongly in the blue region at 445 nm (in water at pH 7) with molar extinction coefficient of c. 40,000". Apparently this refers to a "major problem in astronomical spectroscopy". I looked at the supplied reference to see what this means, but it's a bit obscure and I couldn't understand it. As it stands the paragraph doesn't comply with WP:PCR and it may not have a place here, unless some explanatory context is supplied.

--AntientNestor (talk) 10:46, 15 December 2022 (UTC)