Talk:List of S-phrases

Chemistry Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Occupational Safety and Health Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to occupational safety and health 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.Occupational Safety and HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthTemplate:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthOccupational Safety and Health articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

S10 and S11

Why is there no S10 or S11?? 66.32.191.30 21:15, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Or S31, S32 or S34. They were deleted and/or replaced by new phrases. The list is updated from time to time to take account of advances in understanding of chemical risks, and new public concerns. There is also an attempt to coordinate policy with countries outside the European Union. I couldn't tell you exactly when these phrases were deleted - I would have to look through about 50-odd documents which make up the legal history of Directive 67/548/EEC - but it will be for one of the reasons above. Physchim62 22:00, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Problem to answer

Look at the section labelled "Sierra" at User:Georgia guy/Letter number combinations. Any opinions on putting the meanings of this article's phrases in the appropriate dis-ambiguation pages?? (Currently, the Sierra section goes to S6. Note the rule is to stop when a combination with no dis-ambiguation page is reached.) Georgia guy 02:54, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have no opinion either way; you could always try putting them on and seeing if anyone objects (although disambig pages aren't widely watched). Don't forget that there is also a List of R-phrases which goes with this one. Physchim62 (talk) 03:08, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unsigned comment

For chemicals with phrase S33 "Take precautionary measures against static discharges." How do you go about this?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.70.59.212 (talk • contribs) 08:31, August 25, 2006 (UTC)

Above comment was relocated into a section by The Navigators, and signed.--The Navigators (talk) 23:33, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get the deleted ones in here too?

Marked with a note or placed in a section indicating they've fallen out of use, of course. I'm thinking someone might come across an old reference work that uses one of the deleted S phrases and want to find out what it meant, so we should have that information here for historical purposes. Bryan Derksen 00:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"S42: In case of fire use ... (indicate in the space the precise type of fire-fighting equipment. If water increases the risk add - Never use water)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect S42: In case of fire use ... (indicate in the space the precise type of fire-fighting equipment. If water increases the risk add - Never use water). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 9#S42: In case of fire use ... (indicate in the space the precise type of fire-fighting equipment. If water increases the risk add - Never use water) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm _Talk 23:01, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]