Talk:Sodium fluorosilicate

Overcategorization with a non-approved and invalid chemical name
The Category:Silanuides is presently disputed on the Chemistry Portal at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chemicals

as other overspecialized subcategories created in general categories such as, e.g.:


 * Category: Silicon compounds


 * Categories: Arsenic

Only useful names and relevant categories (i.e., grouping together a reasonable number of pages to ease navigation and discoveries) make sense for the reader. It is also important not to mislead the Wikipedia audience, nor to foster questionable nomenclature practices.

Please, do not change the official IUPAC name, nor add a hyperspecialized category without consensus after discussion on the Chemistry Portal. Thanks, Shinkolobwe (talk) 21:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Systematic name
Several solutions seems possible for a Systematic name for sodium fluorosilicate, by analogy with two examples given in the 2005 Red Book of IUPAC respectively for hexacoordinated moeities of phosphor and platinum:

IR-7.2 Additive Nomenclature, Mononuclear Entities


 * Examples 29 (p. 114 (paper), p. 126 (PDF))


 * [PF6]–: hexafluoridophosphate(1–) (additive),


 * or hexafluoro-λ5-phosphanuide (substitutive)

IR-8.4 Inorganic acids and derivatives


 * Examples 8 (p. 135 (paper), p. 147 (PDF))


 * H2[PtCl6]:2H2O


 * dihydrogen(hexachloridoplatinate)–water (1/2)

For silicon it should give the following:


 * [SiF6]2–: hexafluoridosilicate(2–) (additive),


 * or hexafluoro-λ6-silanuide (substitutive)

The additive naming is certainly the simplest solution of both and has the main advantage to be compatible with the most commonly used names for sodium fluorosilicate. So, I propose to use the simple additive naming in the chembox:

| SystematicName = Sodium hexafluoridosilicate(2–)

In place of the much more kryptic and very rare substitutive naming:

| SystematicName = Disodium hexafluoro-λ6-silanediuide

Reference

When two solutions can be envisaged, I prefer to apply the KISS principle: Keep it simple stupid. Chemistry is already sufficiently complex not to jam the reader when it is not necessary.

Best regards, Shinkolobwe (talk) 23:31, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

To add to article
To add to article: is it safe? 24.56.93.210 (talk) 18:50, 16 June 2016 (UTC)