Talk:Hexamethylphosphoramide

EU classification

HMPA is classified as toxic (T), not harmful (Xn) in the EU (as it is a Group I carcinogen and mutagen). See the ESIS entry: [1]. --84.163.73.25 (talk) 02:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Organophosphorus???

Why is this compound classified as an organophosphorus, since the definition in that article clearly says it isn't? Organophosphorus compounds are degradable chemical compounds containing carbon-phosphorus bonds. Albmont (talk) 13:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well as the intro to organophosphorus explains, the definition is not very strict, at least among non-chemists. The definition of organometallic compound is also blurred, even controversial. Since we are trying to maximize accessibility of these articles to non-specialists, most editors have decided not to argue over the strict definitions. So the operational definition of organo... compound is that the compound be kinda greasy. --Smokefoot (talk) 23:36, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

Can someone name the molybdenum peroxide complex of HMPA that's used as an oxidant? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.220.159.17 (talk) 15:47, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alkali metals solution in this substance

I have added some info about the solutions formed by alkali metals with this substance when interacting with these metals. This info has been removed by user Smokefoot with no clear explanation of the removal. I think his edit must be reverted.--5.2.200.163 (talk) 14:26, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adding That TPPA Can Replace HMPA as a Lewis Base Additive in Reactions Involving Samarium Ketyls

According to Replacement of HMPA in "Samarium Diiodide Promoted Cyclizations and Reactions of Organolithium Compounds", European Journal of Organic Chemistry, Sept 2012, Mathias Berndt, Alexandra Hölemann, André Niermann, Christoph Bentz, Reinhold Zimmer and Hans‐Ulrich Reissig,tripyrrolidinophosphoric acid triamide (TPPA) can replace HMPA as a Lewis base additive in many reactions involving samarium ketyls, and some other reactions. Yields and selectivities of cyclizations of (het)aryl, alkenyl, and alkynyl ketones are similar for both reagents, according to the authors.

I'm adding this information to our article under Alternative Reagents. loupgarous (talk) 19:14, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Colloquial term

Why is adding a common colloquial term considered vandalism? Einsteinalex (talk) 02:42, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.uni-heidelberg.de/fakultaeten/chemgeo/oci/mastalerz/News-Archive.html

https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/13883

https://edoc.ub.uni-muenchen.de/33625/1/Klassmueller_Thomas.pdf (german)

https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/12916 (german)

https://cuvillier.de/uploads/preview/public_file/2897/9783867276894.pdf (german) Einsteinalex (talk) 03:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one provides me an answer, I consider the remove of my change under the reasoning of vandalism as mistake. Einsteinalex (talk) 07:35, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No source was provided for the name, and "liquid cancer" appears uncommon to nonexistent in original English sources I'm aware of. For the English phrase "liquid cancer" to be a valid colloquial term for the en.wikipedia page, you need an English source using it. Lack of citation was why I reverted it.

Somebody just adding "liquid cancer" to the infobox of any chemical without any inline citations for it looks a lot like minor vandalism, especially since it's a colloquialism that could apply to essentially any volatile carcinogen (I've seen it used to describe carbon tetrachloride, for example, in informal settings). InkTide (talk) 17:50, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]