Talk:Chemical nomenclature

Chemistry Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

info about the academic reviews of the topic....

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=allintitle%3A+IUPAC+nomenclature+review&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=IUPAC+nomenclature+review&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

--58.38.43.251 (talk) 03:49, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=IUPAC+nomenclature+reviews&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=IUPAC+nomenclature+reviews&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdts=5&hl=en

--58.38.43.251 (talk) 03:51, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=allintitle%3A+IUPAC+nomenclature+commentary&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=allintitle%3A+IUPAC+nomenclature+commentaries&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

--58.38.43.251 (talk) 03:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=IUPAC+nomenclature+commentaries&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=IUPAC+nomenclature+commentary&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

--58.38.43.251 (talk) 03:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=IUPAC+nomenclature+comment&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdts=5&hl=en

--58.38.43.251 (talk) 04:03, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=allintitle%3A+IUPAC+nomenclature+comments&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

--58.38.43.251 (talk) 04:04, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Search engine producers needs to be aware of this results too--58.38.43.251 (talk) 03:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:05, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IUPAC nomenclature → Chemical nomenclature —

This article covers not only IUPAC nomenclature Wickey-nl (talk) 11:02, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Object it needs a full RM discussion, as it was recently rewritten. Perhaps it should be split into two articles instead. 65.94.44.124 (talk) 05:29, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chemical nomenclature should certainly not be a redirect to IUPAC nomenclature, as IUPAC nomenclature is part of Chemical nomenclature. IUPAC nomenclature can be either a section of Chemical nomenclature, or a separate article. I think the last one will be the better sollution.--Wickey-nl (talk) 16:55, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are many chemical nomenclatures, but only one IUPAC nomenclature. And the latter topic should have enough content for its own article. Cacycle (talk) 07:39, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. A good overview of history can be found in the IUPAC Recommendations 2005: http://www.iupac.org/publications/books/rbook/Red_Book_2005.pdf

--Wickey-nl (talk) 11:54, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Object - Split into two articles IUPAC nomenclature and chemical nomenclature. The former includes terminology (e.g. Orange Book) in addition to the naming of compounds. --Kkmurray (talk) 14:37, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Confused

Examples of compositional names are:

PCl5 phosphorus pentachloride N2O4 dinitrogen tetraoxide An alternative method uses the oxidation state on the metal in place of suffices, e.g.:

SnCl2, tin(II) chloride as an alternative to tin dichloride. Generally this system, known as Stock nomenclature or international nomenclature, is preferred over the prefix system for ionic compounds. wouldn't tin (II)cloride be covalent? Not confident enough to mess with the article... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.26.104.63 (talk) 04:17, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What about examples Mallory Mcbrown (talk) 21:12, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

InChI non-human readable is incorrect.

various problems

Differing aims... - typo - last sentence - "...of the word AT odds with...". Type-II - polyatomic ions - "types of" should be deleted. Peroxide (last in list), for example, contains two atoms but only one type of atom. Why are acetate and permanganate on the same line? Type-III - diphosphorus pentoxide is actually tetraphosphorus decoxide so this isn't a very good example. 69.72.92.109 (talk) 05:41, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chemical nomenclature. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:45, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can't Find References

Hi, I spent a little time trying to fix the 'CS1' errors in the references. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find the papers referenced as Guyton de Morveau, L. B. (1782), J. Phys., 19: 310 {{citation}}: Missing or empty |title= (help). or Berzelius, J. J. (1811), J. Phys., 73: 248 {{citation}}: Missing or empty |title= (help). I couldn't even find this 'J. Phys.' that the papers were published in. If anyone knows, please add the titles to the template and also link to the articles as they are certainly in the public domain. Bhbuehler (talk) 04:56, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reactivity of metals

Reactivity refer to how metals react chemically with atmospheric oxygen,water and acids. Mallory Mcbrown (talk) 21:09, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested content