User talk:Plasmic Physics/Archive 1

Welcome
Hi Plasmic Physics, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

""

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

""

Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome!

- Pyrotec (talk) 11:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Templates
Hi Plasmic Physics, Are you vandalising the element info boxes? You have very recently changed Template:Infobox_oxygen, Template:Infobox_sulfur and Template:Infobox_phosphorus without any explanation in the edit summaries. In all three cases you have removed an oxidation state and an associated reference and inserted a different oxidation state and a different reference. The oxidation state and reference that you have removed were valid so I have reinstated them. It would help in future if you would summarise what you are doing.Pyrotec (talk) 10:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. Your changes to those four templates appeared to be incorrect and they were done without an edit summary. If you click on the links and go to the history tab you can compare versions. I think that the edits that you made were not correct, so I will leave them as they are. You are welcome to change them, but please add an edit summary.Pyrotec (talk) 11:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Warut (talk) 11:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Warut (talk) 11:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * This is the same problem I mentioned above. It was an edit without an edit summary, and there was a typo: you used Si26+ is a ployatomic ion instead of polyatomic ion; and the insertion did not really match the rest of the paragraph. I would suggest that you use the Show preview button before you press Save page. It might help if you made yourself a User page. With no user page and vandalism warnings in your talk page you may considered to be a threat if another editor disagrees with the changes you made.Pyrotec (talk) 12:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 12:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Oxidation states
Reposting here since you seem to be the same user as User:222.153.150.12.

Nitrogen does form compounds in the +1 oxidation state (FN=NF) and in the -1 oxidation state (HN=NH). I've reverted your edit accordingly. Please look at a decent book such as before deleting more oxidation states. --Itub (talk) 12:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I've replied to your message in my talk page, to try to keep the conversation in one place. --Itub (talk) 07:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Refs inside templates
There appears to be a bug associated with references declared inside of templates. I have cut and pasted the template expansion into the beryllium article, which is the work-around. If you do the same on other cases where this is a problem, please use the edit-comment to explain why you did this. Also, when cutting and pasting from the template to the main article, make sure you exclude cutting and pasting any &lt;noinclude&gt; ... &lt;/noinclude&gt; sections in the template. Karl Hahn (T) (C) 12:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * One more detail. As a matter of style, it is preferable to put the ref after the punctuation (e.g. text to be referenced,&lt;ref&gt; ... &lt;/ref&gt;). Manual of Style and Citing sources has lots more useful how-to info. Check it out. Karl Hahn (T) (C) 12:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Trilithium(1+) Ion Azanetriide
I think that most chemistry-literate editors would consider your renaming lithium nitride as "Trilithium(1+) Ion Azanetriide" as ill-advised, to be mild. If you want to discuss your approach before acting, then please consult with Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals. Please desist from such edits. --Smokefoot (talk) 12:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note, I appreciate it. You are formally correct that the IUPAC name, if one understands the convention, conveys some information on the stoichiometry (the structure's another thing - at least for inorganics!), but to most chemists lithium nitride does indicate a nitride, N3-.  But even my interpretation is unimportant.  The important message is that most chemistry people understand and use the lithium nitride name and not the IUPAC name.  In the "Wikipedia chem universe", we intermittently encounter clever folks (smart enough to fathom IUPAC) that decide or semi-insist that Wikipedia should be using IUPAC more strictly.  The consensus is that strict IUPACness is not in wide (or even minor!) usage. A related case was for tetrafluoroborate where another editor decided that we should be calling this stuff "tetrafluoridoborate," because that name is apparently recommended by IUPAC.  The resolution to the frustration for you and related IUPAC-recommenders is to create "redirects" so that IUPAC-recommended names are at least searchable.  If you did that kind of edit, you would be rendering a serious service.  Eventually, probably, IUPAC nomenclature will prevail, but for the meantime I recommend against forcing the issue by re-editing names in the articles.  I think that my views are fairly consensus-y, but you can always check at the Chem project talk pages. You'll get lots of responses because the editing community is familiar with the arguments on both sides. Again, I really appreciate your responding to me and opening a dialogue, especially after my semi-nasty note.  Good luck and happy editing.--Smokefoot (talk) 04:11, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, when the ChemBox indicates IUPAC name, we in fact should give the IUPAC name. Of course.  Then there is the article name itself (rarely IUPAC) and often in some chem boxes a slot for "other names."  The lede paragraph rarely mentions IUPAC unless it has become current.

To expand on my comments above, slightly: The "political" problem with IUPAC naming is this: in most chemists' experience, instructors most insistent on nomenclature were usually weaker intellectually than those whose lectures focused on physical reality.

Good luck with your editing, seems that you have a plan.--Smokefoot (talk) 13:09, 17 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Also keep in mind that there can be more than one valid "IUPAC name". --Itub (talk) 13:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Before you start editing any more IUPAC names, I would very much like to know exactly which IUPAC rules you think are behind these names. IUPAC's Red Book clearly says: "charges [...] need not be specified in stoichiometric names" and that "multiplicative prefixes need not be used in binary names if there is no ambiguity about the stoichiometry of the compound". Even if some of your names might be correct under some obscure scheme, they are unnecessarily complicated. Multiple IUPAC names are possible in most cases, but the simplest one is generally preferable. If you don't agree please take the discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry where other people can give their opinion. --Itub (talk) 05:58, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Trilithium(+) ??? This cluster ion is new to me and I suspect a lot of other people. Please can you change the name back to a correct name as per IUPAC -- unfortunately there is no PIN, "preferred IUPAC name" for inorganic compounds (2005 recommendations) so there are a lot to choose from,  trilithium nitride, trilithium azanetriide, lithium nitride, lithium azanetriide, lithium(I) nitride etc.etc. --Axiosaurus (talk) 07:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I beg to differ! See the 2005 red book section 5.3.2.3,(NOMENCLATURE OF INORGANIC CHEMISTRY IUPAC Recommendations 2005 ed. N. G. Connelly et al. RSC Publishing,the full text can be downloaded from IUPACNomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry IUPAC Recommendations 2005) for the naming of polyatomic ions where they give the name of, for example, Bi54+ as pentabismuth(4+). --Axiosaurus (talk) 08:12, 19 September 2008 (UTC) I should have added that the -ylium ending is used when the ion is conceptually derived from a parent hydride by loss of a single hydride ion e.g SiH3+ would be silylium. Hope this clarifies this.--Axiosaurus (talk) 08:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

''PLEASE STOP' changing IUPAC names. the names you are inserting are chemically incorrect and nomenclaturally nonsense. If you continue to change these parameters wthout discussion, this could be construed as vandalism. Physchim62 (talk) 10:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see
I saw your latest edits on the Li compounds. Unfortunate.--Smokefoot (talk) 03:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Checking in with WikiProject Chemicals
You will find that simply imposing a view of IUPAC names can be taken negatively. Many naming conventions exist and the name that you think should be displaced could be placed in the "other names" category. It is always a good idea to check with the Wikipedia project at WikiProject Chemicals about plans that might be broadly impacting.--Smokefoot (talk) 14:15, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:(1E)-1-npd-1-e.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:(1E)-1-npd-1-e.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 06:20, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Your recent chemfobox changes
I and wikipedia project chemistry WP:CHEM oppose your recent changes of IUPAC names. Let us consider titanium nitride; your proposed name "titanium(3+) ion azanetriïde" is not used in the world, as obvious from a Google search. Another issue which I oppose with titanium nitride is deletion of a chemical structure and its symmetry; that structure is by no means "specific" to one compound, but to the whole class of related binaries. I wish to believe in your sincere effort to improve WP, but WP:CHEM members suggest this might not be the case, and your edits might be considered as vandalism. Materialscientist (talk) 12:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) The biggest issue here is conventions. For certain reasons, the world and WP has reached a consensus on how to name chemicals and to present information on them. Unilateral opposition of those is allowed, but spreading it through changing WP articles does require discussion first. The best place for such discussion in this case is WP:CHEM. Without a prior discussion, all radical attempts will be opposed by various editors, and reverting them is by no means a proper way to spread your message.
 * 2) I'm not a chemist to explain you why your proposed IUPAC names are being rejected. I can just tell that if a name is not used, there is a reason, and it is to be respected. If you look at history of any chemical element, they all had several proposed names in the past, which nobody remembers now.
 * 3) Adding blank fields into chemboxes is a technical issue and should be taken reasonably. Practice tells that some fields (density, melting, etc.) will be filled up and thus better be kept, empty or not. On the other hand, some fields never (or rarely) get filled. Thus adding them only swells the article (by ~ 1 kb) in your edits, which is a drawback (slows the loading time; harder to edit, etc.). Materialscientist (talk) 23:41, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Trilithium(1+) ion azanetriide
A tag has been placed on Trilithium(1+) ion azanetriide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 05:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Dilithium(1+) ion oxidandiide
A tag has been placed on Dilithium(1+) ion oxidandiide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 05:05, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Lithium(1+) ion fluoride
A tag has been placed on Lithium(1+) ion fluoride, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 05:06, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Dilithium(1+) ion sulfanediide
A tag has been placed on Dilithium(1+) ion sulfanediide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Lithium(1+) ion chloride
A tag has been placed on Lithium(1+) ion chloride, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Lithium(1+) ion bromide
A tag has been placed on Lithium(1+) ion bromide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Lithium(1+) ion iodide
A tag has been placed on Lithium(1+) ion iodide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Diberyllium(2+) ion methanetetraide
A tag has been placed on Diberyllium(2+) ion methanetetraide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Triberyllium(2+) ion diazanetriide
A tag has been placed on Triberyllium(2+) ion diazanetriide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Beryllium(2+) ion difluoride
A tag has been placed on Beryllium(2+) ion difluoride, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Beryllium(2+) ion dichloride
A tag has been placed on Beryllium(2+) ion dichloride, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Beryllium(2+) ion dibromide
A tag has been placed on Beryllium(2+) ion dibromide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Tellanylideneberyllium
A tag has been placed on Tellanylideneberyllium, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Beryllium(2+) ion diiodide
A tag has been placed on Beryllium(2+) ion diiodide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Boranylidyneamine
A tag has been placed on Boranylidyneamine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Diboron(3+) ion trioxidandiide
A tag has been placed on Diboron(3+) ion trioxidandiide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Boranylidynephosphane
A tag has been placed on Boranylidynephosphane, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Sulfanylidene((sulfanylideneboranyl)sulfanyl)borane
A tag has been placed on Sulfanylidene((sulfanylideneboranyl)sulfanyl)borane, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Nitro nitrate
A tag has been placed on Nitro nitrate, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Nitrosooxidanyl
A tag has been placed on Nitrosooxidanyl, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Methanedione
A tag has been placed on Methanedione, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Triiodoamine
A tag has been placed on Triiodoamine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Tribromoamine
A tag has been placed on Tribromoamine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Trichloramine
A tag has been placed on Trichloramine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Trichloroamine
A tag has been placed on Trichloroamine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Sulfanylideneaminyl
A tag has been placed on Sulfanylideneaminyl, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Trifluoramine
A tag has been placed on Trifluoramine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Trifluoroamine
A tag has been placed on Trifluoroamine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Triiodoborane
A tag has been placed on Triiodoborane, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Tribromoborane
A tag has been placed on Tribromoborane, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Trichloroborane
A tag has been placed on Trichloroborane, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Methanidylidyneoxidanium
A tag has been placed on Methanidylidyneoxidanium, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I note that on 29 September 2010, you reinserted this name as a supposed alternate name in the infobox for carbon monoxide. I have just deleted it. As several chemists have been telling you repeatedly on this talk page, your interpretations of the chemistry nomenclature rules do not conform to the names used by real chemists. Perhaps it would be best to check with the chemistry professors before adding any more original names to Wikipedia. Dirac66 (talk) 03:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)


 * It is not an alternate name, it is the substitutive systematic name approved by the IUPAC red book of 2005. Try telling other chemists that IUPAC nomenclature systematic nomenclature rules do not conform to those used by real chemists.  Relative to recent nomenclature discussions pertaining to me, this is an old edit and no longer a basis for renewed discontent.  --Plasmic Physics (talk) 04:48, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Sodium hydrogenuide
A tag has been placed on Sodium hydrogenuide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Disodium oxidandiide
A tag has been placed on Disodium oxidandiide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Trisodium phosphanetriide
A tag has been placed on Trisodium phosphanetriide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Disodium sulfanediide
A tag has been placed on Disodium sulfanediide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Magnesium(2+) ion dihydrogenuide
A tag has been placed on Magnesium(2+) ion dihydrogenuide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Oxomagnesium
A tag has been placed on Oxomagnesium, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Magnesium(2+) ion difluoride
A tag has been placed on Magnesium(2+) ion difluoride, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Dimagnesiumylidenesilane
A tag has been placed on Dimagnesiumylidenesilane, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Sulfanylidenemagnesium
A tag has been placed on Sulfanylidenemagnesium, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Magnesium(2+) ion dichloride
A tag has been placed on Magnesium(2+) ion dichloride, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Magnesium(2+) ion dibromide
A tag has been placed on Magnesium(2+) ion dibromide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Magnesium(2+) ion diiodide
A tag has been placed on Magnesium(2+) ion diiodide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Oxoberyllium
A tag has been placed on Oxoberyllium, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Tetracube (talk) 16:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi there

I reverted your last edit because I don't see how it adds value to the article. It is usually possible to generate several systematic names for any compound, but it doesn't matter since this name (DMSO) is the most common and accepted. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 04:34, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Please stop
Dear Plasma Physics,

Have you seen the latest discussion about your edits at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals?

There are many editors who find you addition of (supposedly) IUPAC names unhelpful, but none (except you) who support them.

It would benefit Wikipedia, and in particular its chemistry articles, if you would at least engage in discussion on the matter.

Ben (talk) 11:16, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, I second that. You've been asked before - look at the top of this page! Come and talk to us.... Chris (talk) 11:21, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello again. Can we try and discuss this all in one place, like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals? Thanks, Chris (talk) 13:32, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

DIDS
Sorry about that revert at DIDS. I must have accidently clicked the revert button somehow. My apologies - it was entirely unintentional. Thanks for all the improvements you've been making to chemical articles lately. They are very helpful. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:24, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Neutronium
Why is infobox neutronium a violation of Wikipedia policies or guidelines? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 00:20, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion, Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. Moreover, the IUPAC does not consider the neutron or "isotopes" thereof to deserve a position on the periodic table. Therefore, at the current time, the notion of Neutronium as an element is original thought not fact.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 01:05, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Nonsense. The "Nt" may (or may not be) original thought, but the rest is from reliable sources, although not official statements of IUPAC. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 03:56, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * An element infobox insinuates that neutronium is an element, which is misleading.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 04:02, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. Regardless, it is not against Wikipedia policy or guidelines, and you are subject to 3RR. Just as a reminder....

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Neutronium. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 06:18, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I was wondering why you reverted my addition of the navbox Template:States of matter to the neutronium article? Neutronium is listed in the navbox. You did not leave an edit summary. Thanks. David Hollman (Talk) 09:44, 2 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Neutronium is not an established state of matter, it is a metaphysical notion with many interpretations.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 09:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I think this discussion would be more useful on the article's talk page, I made a new section there. David Hollman (Talk) 10:12, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Helium hydride ion
Hey there

I removed the chembox you added, because chemboxes are only for compounds, not for ions. There's been talk of a box for ions which could use the same style, but nothing has happened out of it. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 02:50, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Noted, I will not insert more chemboxes for ions.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 03:06, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Carbonite
My apologies that you needed to fix this, it was just a dumb typo on my part. —  pd_THOR  undefined | 02:49, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


 * No bother.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 02:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox neutronium
Template:Infobox neutronium has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Icalanise (talk) 15:40, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Fluoromethylidyne
Does it exist then? I cannot believe it can be stable. Certainly I could not see it in the three patents shown by ChemSpider, and I couldn't find any other data (the other data on ChemSpider is (I suspect) computer generated based on structure.  Ron h jones (Talk) 10:30, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, as a ligand it actually forms quite stable transition metal complexes.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 10:37, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That doesn't mean it exists. The article says it is a compound, but that I find hard to believe. It needs correcting and references, and failing that should be deleted. Chris (talk) 22:07, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

I can see it might be part of a complex (a bit like CO) - that could stabilise it, but as a unique entity, I also have my doubts. I will continue to look for data, if it ends up with no references that are valid, then maybe it needs to go to AfD  Ron h jones (Talk) 22:14, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Check Google Scholar.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 02:01, 2 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I've no doubt the name exists (and as I see the Article says), as a short lived radical, rather than a discrete compound. Also as I noted on that talk page, there are journals that have used the name (maybe incorrectly) to describe a compound (CF)n, made from norit carbon and fluorine, but that is not the same. I have not read the journals, as I only have access (to some) as work, from home - I can only do Reaxys searches.  Ron h jones (Talk) 20:33, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

SMILES/InChI/etc.
Hmm .. I see we use different sources for our InChI's and SMILES. I am running a script, which updates it from one source (ChemSpider) and validates that one (I do think it is a correct SMILES / InChI) .. and validates that version of the Wikipedia. And you use another one here and there, which results in CheMoBot tagging all these ChemBoxes as 'wrong' (which is not really true, of course, there are different flavours of SMILES and InChI's) .. When, soon, I am going to switch over to really keeping them validated (as we already do for the CASNo), this would mark a lot of pages as 'being wrong'.

May I ask you, which source you use (or do you generate them yourself) .. I could write the script to use your same source (maybe). For me, ignoring the InChI and SMILES is not really an option, as there will be ones which are really wrong at the moment (so which need to be updated to one of the sources anyway), or empty (which I am trying to add). Another option is, that you, after you update the SMILES/InChI's, also update WikiProject Chemicals/Index/WikiProject Pharmacology/Index Thoughts? --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:20, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Check http://inchi.info/#news-7 for details on Standardised InChIs and InChIKeys as opposed to non-standard. Standardised forms were introduced in 2009. I generate the identifiers myself. PubChem and ChemSpider doesn't always have the correct structure.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 13:00, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

I know that PubChem/ChemSpider have wrong structures (well, they all have ..). I do most by eye, so if the structure is incorrect, or too difficult, then I ignore it and move on. Interesting problem. Maybe we should consider to use the standard InChI and SMILES .. and update all the revids then accordingly. I'm only not sure how to do that scripted (and doing these 11.000 all completely by hand is going to take .. ages, we do need some automation help). Any ideas? Could you provide lists which I could load into my script? --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:34, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Maybe we can automate the indentifier assignment process, but mark and isolate instances which are manually overwritten. So, whenever an identifier is manually overwritten by a user, it is marked by adding code to the identifier which, has priority over the bot's directive.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 01:24, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I could do something like that. By the way, it is a script, certainly not a bot (the changes are presented to me, I have to check the identifiers, and then acknowledge it is correct); I could check whether you (e.g.) 'upgraded' the InChI and SMILES, and if so, use a revid with those InChI/SMILES in the index. Thanks for the thoughts, I'll start re-coding tomorrow! --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:53, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

I've adapted the script for now so that it does at least not re-(re-(re-(re-)))update the InChI, InChIKey and SMILES. I'll generate a list later of the cases where they are changed from the ChemSpider version, and check what we want to do with those (I would suggest that we just use those, and update the revids of correct versions in the indices. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 11:13, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * How do I update the revids?--Plasmic Physics (talk) 22:55, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Al4C3
Hi, no offense intended by my basically erasing your fine analysis of charges and bonding in this carbide. Such exercises seem useful in the classroom (not to me, but they are common), but my sense is that including such analysis verges on OR and encouraging other, perhaps less informed editors to discuss/speculate on immeasureables, such as the degrees of covalency, formal charges, vs measureables such as coordination geometry and coordination number. The carbides and borides are just very complicated, it seems to me. But if you strongly disagree, feel free to indicate your views on some talk page. With best wishes, --Smokefoot (talk) 18:02, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Drugbox --> Chembox
I don't disagree... but do you really want to quarrel with the druggies? --Rifleman 82 (talk) 05:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * No, not really, no one has ever contested any of my Drugbox to Chembox exports. I think that is tidier this way, Chemboxes are easier for me to update anyways.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 05:55, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Noticed you had changed a few more drugboxes to chemboxes round the place. I tend to use drugboxes most of the time, just because the SMILES code acts as a hyperlink straight to the PubChem structure search window, however chembox probably is more appropriate for compounds that are not used in humans. I would suggest a drugbox is more appropriate for any compound used in humans though. Meodipt (talk) 08:09, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I just find that chemboxes are more versatile and accomodating. Plasmic Physics (talk) 08:32, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * IMO the two box templates should be merged into one (flexible) box. In de.wikipedia, there were also two boxes, but there is just one now. --Leyo 10:02, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, I don't think a merge is an appropriate course of action - the chembox already contains all the drugbox fields, and many more; there would be nothing to merge. When the drugbox was first created, there was no such major overlap, and it had a genuine purpose. Plasmic Physics (talk) 11:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * That's just the problem though, neither box contains all the fields that might potentially be needed - chembox has no field for legal status for instance, which may be an issue for quite a few chemicals that are not actually used as drugs, but are listed as precursors to either illegal drugs, explosives or chemical weapons - depending on jurisdiction this includes some really major industrial chemicals like acetone and nitric acid for instance. While the drugbox has no fields for things like optical rotation of single enantiomers of drugs, or for physical hazards such as where the compound is flammable or explosive. So even though all drugs are also chemicals, neither drugbox or chembox is suitable for every compound - look at glyceryl trinitrate for instance, we have one page for its use as a drug and one page for its use as a chemical, which creates a certain amount of redundancy. Similar issues arise for medical use of xenon (although of course this has an element box not a chembox). I would tentatively support a merge of the two boxes, although I'm not sure how much of a logistical challenge this would present. Meodipt (talk) 23:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * IMO glyceryl trinitrate is an example of how it should not be. It seems that en.wikipedia is the only one that has two separate articles on the same substance. The box in the article on de.wikipedia contains both types of information. --Leyo 00:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Meodipt: of course the chembox does, look at the pharmacology section in template:chembox. Plasmic Physics (talk) 05:45, 22 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, I had not come across those fields before. Would still be better if the SMILES code in the chembox linked straight to PubChem though! Meodipt (talk) 10:11, 22 March 2011 (UTC)


 * First, I do not have a big problem with changing them over, though for clarity it is better that compounds that have a main use as a drug are with a drugbox, and the others with a chembox. I would not mind a 'clone' of the box, or something like that.  Having drugs with a differently coloured box is actually nice, easier to recognise.
 * That is the problem with SMILES, Meodipt. Why PubChem?  PubChem does not 'own' SMILES, why not .. you name it.
 * Moreover, SMILES is too error-prone, too many different ways of displaying it. SMILES and InChI (the latter already being a better, though also not fail-save identifier) are better just as is, and use the 'real' identifiers to link to pubchem (i.e., one of the correct pubchem IDs).  I hope this helps.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 10:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)