Talk:Prismane C8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chemicals WikiProject
Chemistry Portal
Prismane C8 is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
Stub This article has been rated as stub-Class on the wikiproject's quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

This article really needs a picture of the molecule. Anyone know how to provide one? I'm afraid I don't know how. RobertAustin 23:51, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

It is me opinion that a 2 sentance article about a cool but unremarkable isomer could be merger into the main article, which, btw, is about as long. --CastAStone 16:52, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
I have to agree with CastAStone. This would probably be more useful if merged into the existing Prismane article. Magus05 (talk) 06:49, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Is it an allotrope of carbon? Or an isomer? --Rifleman 82 11:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Prismane C8 and prismane are completely different compounds - the first is a cluster of only carbon atoms, the second is a hydrocarbon. They should not be merged. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:47, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
This compound is as related to prismane as graphite is related to benzene--not much. In any case if it were merged somewhere it should be into Allotropes of carbon. --Itub 09:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Now that I actually looked at the reference, I'm not sure if we could call this an allotrope. It seems to me that it is better described as a carbon cluster that has been modeled computationally in the gas phase, but never observed experimentally. I'm even starting to have my doubts as to whether it is notable enough to deserve its own article. The original publication on this has been cited only 12 times, out of which 10 are self-cites. I suggest merging it for now into allotropes of carbon (for lack of a more specific article on carbon clusters), into a new subsection called "small carbon clusters". --Itub 09:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)