Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hypothetical chemical compound


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. There is consensus that an article is viable, though whether it should be a list rather than a prose piece is something for future discussions to decide. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:25, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Hypothetical chemical compound

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Appears to be a dictionary definition with few sources and a good chunk of original research; not much evidence of discussion as a general, standalone topic, as opposed to methods such as the Born–Haber cycle for predicting compounds. The only sources are one about a claimed observation of ethylene dione, and a book that discusses a lot of theoretical chemistry in the context of crystallography, but also does not discuss hypothetical compounds by themselves. Not every category needs a main article. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 21:31, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 ( d  c̄ ) 21:31, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep the topic is notable, and there are many publications trying to predict compounds. The concerns here about content, which can be edited to improve. It appears that most statements are not original research, and are true. The problem is that they are unreferenced. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:18, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't see any references supporting the idea that the abstract CONCEPT of a hypothetical chemical compound is itself notable.PianoDan (talk) 17:51, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep This *should* be a good wiki page with many examples, including the histories of compounds that were first proposed as hypothetical, but later became actual. Xenon compounds come to mind as an example. The page needs a lot of work and should really be made from the ground up. One option would be to send this page to draft space until it is brought up to standard (which it absolutely can be). -- Tautomers (T C) 23:57, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Sounds more like List of hypothetical chemical compounds is what you have in mind.Agricolae (talk) 01:46, 9 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep, per what's been said already, and per a large volume of academic coverage of compounds that haven't been demonstrated to exist. Many trans-uranic elements have published simulations of their chemical properties due to the impracticality of actual experimentation; see Darmstadtium ("Darmstadtium hexafluoride (DsF6) is predicted to have very similar properties to its lighter homologue platinum hexafluoride (PtF6), having very similar electronic structures and ionization potentials[3][66][67]"), Tennessine, Oganesson (including things as obvious as Og2!) Of course, all the things I'm mentioning here are thoroughly sourced (the predicted properties of tennessine chloride, for example, going to ). jp×g 02:06, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Move to List of hypothetical chemical compounds - the latest 'Keep' !votes are saying that individual hypothetical compounds have received coverage so the umbrella category of hypothetical compounds must be notable, but that's not how it works. It requires us to commit WP:SYNTH to extrapolate from the specific to the general in this manner, just to organize what will invariably end up as an WP:EXAMPLEFARM anyhow. The only way to square the circle is to make it a list. Agricolae (talk) 19:21, 10 November 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.