Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals/archive02

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive of the wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals/List of A-Class articles

Contents 1 Acetic acid 2 Acetone 3 Ammonia 4 1,3-Butadiene 5 Carbon monoxide 6 DNA 7 Ethanol 8 Folic acid 9 Formaldehyde 10 Hydrogen peroxide 11 Methanol 12 Propionic acid 13 Protein 14 Rhodium(III) chloride 15 Sodium sulfate 16 Testosterone 17 Toluene 18 Water 19 Cadmium chloride 20 Chloroform 21 Benzene 22 Indole 23 Preliminary classified as A-Class, with remarks 24 Phosphorus trichloride 25 Phosphoryl chloride 26 1,3-Butadiene 27 Sodium hydroxide 28 Sulfuric acid 29 Ozone 30 Aspirin

[edit] Acetic acid

no sources cited. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC), and the Chembox needs completing. Wim van Dorst 11:35, 17 July 2005 (UTC).

• Re-assessment: full chembox now, and a reference. Problems solved. Wim van Dorst 21:07, 26 August 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Acetone

no sources cited. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC).

• Re-assessment: still no sources, although improvement in chembox and text. Wim van Dorst 21:10, 26 August 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Ammonia

I can't think of much else to write on this esoteric hydride of nitrogen, but I am sure you will provide me with inspiration if required! Physchim62 21:25, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

A beautiful piece of work, A+ class! Thank you so much for all the hard work. The old version of the page was an "OK" page- but the new version seems much sharper in style to me. I presume that things like NaSCN are not acids in liq. ammonia, so I rephrased that section, otherwise it looks great! I'd nominate it for FA, if it wasn't for HCl being so recent. Thanks PC. Walkerma 16:53, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the copyediting—that section now says what I meant it to! The old version relied heavily on the 1911 Britannica, with the plusses and minusses that that entails... As for nominating articles for FA, I agree that we should wait a little while, if only to show that they have stable content (the latest WikiFashion). In the case of ammonia, the red links should really be filled in first (things like metallic solution, solvated electron, spectrochemical series). On the basis of numbers of articles (2500/750k), we should have chemistry on the front page once every 9 months or so: as we are a reasonably active project, I think we should aim to send an article to WP:PR every six months or so (obviously no quotas, nor sending articles which obviously don't make the grade). Physchim62 21:10, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

• And here's indeed another good piece of work that cropped up in the vacation period. Compliments, PC! This decidedly is an A-Class now. Wim van Dorst 21:01, 26 August 2005 (UTC).

Regarding the FA comment, for variety I would like to see "something completely different", such as an organic natural product or something like that. It should be something of general interest - but please, not lysergic acid, cocaine, etc...! I agree with the 6 month suggestion. Walkerma 22:07, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree, although what I would really like to see is a chemistry FA which does not deal with a specific chemical (outside the scope of this prjoect, I know). Limonene seems to have potential on these criteria, as would menthol. I'll have a think about it, but it is further from my central area of expertise. Physchim62 16:22, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 1,3-Butadiene

no sources cited. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC).

• Re-assessment: No changes yet. Wim van Dorst 21:03, 26 August 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Carbon monoxide

no sources cited. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC).

• re-assessment: no sources added, and the rest isn't up to the expected level either. Wim van Dorst 21:13, 26 August 2005 (UTC).

[edit] DNA

Can this have a chembox? Voted for deletion from wikiproject. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC).

• I think that removing DNA and protein from the project is an good idea. Let's stick to individual "chemical entities". ~K 8 July 2005 16:31 (UTC)

[edit] Ethanol

no sources, bad figure. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC).

• re-assessment: Whoaw, lots of changes, by dozens of people. Although it definitely cannot be called a stable wikipage yet, the requirements for Chem A-Class are now definitely met. Wim van Dorst 21:27, 26 August 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Folic acid

Contains only bio-info. Not enough chem. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC).

• My objection to Folic acid is that there are so many references that I wonder about its NPOV status. The references should be changed to Wikipedia:Footnote3 format to facilitate future editing (this is classic example of where FN3 format is useful, to avoid referencing errors in future updates).Physchim62 8 July 2005 10:02 (UTC)
• Have now rechecked the article, it appears to be OK for NPOV. However, the reference numbering is already broken... Some material needs to be moved to Homocysteine, and some more "hard" biochem would be welcome (at present it is mostly medical info). Physchim62 17:05, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
  • I have now converted the referencing to FN3, the other comments still apply. Physchim62 17:50, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
• re-assessment: very much a bio page. But then again, the whole value of folic acid is in it's biochemistry. Perhaps we should say that, similar to the Drugs wikipages, this page is as good as it ought to be with respect to hard chemistry, and give it the Chem A-Class (sort of benefit of the doubt). Wim van Dorst 21:34, 26 August 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Formaldehyde

insufficient sources, whitespace, old style chembox. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC).

• Handled whitespace, and updated chembox. Wim van Dorst 10:17, 17 July 2005 (UTC).
• Re-assessment: text and chembox ok, but no references or sources. Wim van Dorst 21:30, 26 August 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Hydrogen peroxide

problem with image, old style chembox, no hazards data. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC).

• I updated the chembox, added hazards data to the table. But the article needs much more info in the sections. As it is, I still don't think it is A-Class. Wim van Dorst 20:58, 15 July 2005 (UTC).
  • I agree it needs a cleanup, but it hard to see other blatant omissions. A bit of biochem, perhaps? Physchim62 09:02, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
    • There is almost nothing on the chemistry besides its decomposition. And what of its uses in organic synthesis? Oxidation of sulfides to sulfoxides & sulfones? Epoxidation of electron-deficient C=C double bonds? Use in the standard oxidative workup after hydroboration? Use as a stoichiometric oxidant in conjunction with OsO4 in making syn-diols? All of these are familiar to organic chemists- 3 of these are in my introductory textbook, 2 will be on the exam I give next week! There should also be something about using it to make sodium perborate and sodium percarbonate, and probably other bleaching materials used in commercial detergents, as well as organic peroxides. Walkerma 14:02, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Things missing is not biochemistry but real hard chemistry. Production methods, real uses (or does it only have consumer applications?). It isn't a bad article, I agree to a B-Class, but there is just too little chemical compound information in it to warrant Chem A-Class. Wim van Dorst 21:46, 16 July 2005 (UTC).
    • Yep, you're right. OK for a downgrade, although there is probably no harm done in leaving it here until the end of the summer to see if anyone feels like addressing these problems. Physchim62 10:46, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Indeed, it stays here (and {{Chem A-Class}}) until the ultimatum date. That's the deal, as is pointed out in the opening paragraph. Hydrogen peroxide is an interesting chemical compound, so indeed someone may feel like to work on it. Wim van Dorst 17:57, 18 July 2005 (UTC).
• I have done a major rewrite of this. Please can you look it over, and see if anything else is needed to make it A-class? PC, do you want to add anything on safety? I'm probably not very objective on this, many years ago I stood & watched my former place of employment burn after a massive H2O2 explosion & fire. Perhaps that's why I took out most of the "How to make rocket fuel at home" section! I got quite emotional rewriting this article... Walkerma 18:10, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
  • What can I say, Martin? Well done is so repetitive, as I write that for all your major rewrites and new articles ;-). That only thing that remains to be improved (if you'd want that) is the image in the table. You wouldn't happen to have a picture of your former place of employment while undergoing this H2O2 reaction? Wim van Dorst 18:39, 24 August 2005 (UTC).
• No probs with the article now. Should it include a short paragraph about "volumes" concentrations, or are these now completely obsolete? Physchim62 21:22, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Methanol

no sources. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC).

• re-assessment: A good page indeed, but still no current day references (that 1661 reference is interesting though: it predates the USA by far ;-). Wim van Dorst 21:38, 26 August 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Propionic acid

Minor isuues on article talk page. Physchim62 11:05, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Protein

can this have a chembox? Voted for deletion. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC)

• Hijacked text from another paragraph: Can I propose that "Protein" be deleted from this project, as it is a general term like "aldehyde" or "carbohydrate". Walkerma 6 July 2005 21:27 (UTC)
• I think that removing DNA and protein from the project is an good idea. Let's stick to individual "chemical entities". ~K 8 July 2005 16:31 (UTC)

[edit] Rhodium(III) chloride

Perhaps slightly short, and limited on various details, but nothing wrong with it that can't be solved with a big whopping full chemical infobox. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 20:23 (UTC). Needs some chemical properties/reactions I think. I may be able to do this, I have a book out at the moment on this topic, though I am travelling this weekend. Walkerma 8 July 2005 22:00 (UTC)

• Thanks for the marvellous work Martin. I will pile into the Uses section on this one at the start of August, when I will have the references in front of me. After all, I did my PhD on rhodium and iridium complexes! Physchim62 11:31, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sodium sulfate

Although a no-brainer for upgraded classification, I would formally here like to propose to make the sodium sulphate article a full A-Classer. Thanks, Martin, for the excellent work on it. Preliminarily, I already re-graded the worklist entries, as I'll be off for holidays, presently. Wim van Dorst 21:58, 31 July 2005 (UTC).

Wow. And I thought it was just a drying agent. Great work. Definitely A-Class. ~K 00:56, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Excellent article, but do we really need the "Precautions" section? Physchim62 21:24, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

PC, you tend to be our toxicology person- if you're OK with it, I'm happy to lose the precautions section. I'll just make sure we have an MSDS linked via the table. Is that OK? Walkerma 23:33, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I would quite like a "Precautions" section along the lines of "Sodium sulfate has been used as a laxative: ingestion may have laxative effects"... maybe not! ;) The MSDS should be linked from the "External links" section of either the main page or the supplementary data page (not from the table because of MSIE bug). Keep up the good work! Physchim62 00:16, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Testosterone

insufficient sources/references. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC).

• Re-assessment: I don't know whether this wikipage complies with the requirements for the Drugs wikiproject, but IMHO it doesn't fulfill the references of a Chem A-Class, still. I'll accept the Drugs chembox, though. Wim van Dorst 21:41, 26 August 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Toluene

meager info in the sections. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC).

• It still isn't fat in the text, but as a short and concise article, it does have all the requirements now. Another benefit of the doubt, to be given Chem A-Class? Wim van Dorst 21:45, 26 August 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Water

insufficient sources? Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 15:24 (UTC).

• Needs some work doing on it, even if most of the basics are there. At present it reads as if the authors doesn't quite know what their talking about... I will see if I can get around to it once I have finished with Ammonia. Physchim62 23:08, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
• Re-assessment: PC, I see you haven't come around to getting your hands on Water yet, but given the excellent result on Ammonia, you're excused, of course. Current status is IMHO unchanged. Wim van Dorst 21:48, 26 August 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Cadmium chloride

Needs a bit of editing, table update, but for the rest is seems to fulfill all A-Class requirements. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 20:09 (UTC).
Henry kindly improved the crystal structure image. Walkerma 8 July 2005 22:02 (UTC)

[edit] Chloroform

Seems to be rather complete. Wim van Dorst July 8, 2005 20:38 (UTC).
Needs some chemistry, I think, for example formation of dichlorocarbene. Walkerma 8 July 2005 22:02 (UTC)

• There has been no significant improvement to the article since we downgraded it to B-Class. My objections still stand: this article needs carefully written Toxicology and Safety/Hazards sections before it can be considered complete, all the more so given the controversy over the chlorination of drinking water. Oh, and a bit more pure chemistry wouldn´t go amiss either! Physchim62 11:31, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Benzene

Needs to have the rest of the chembox filled in, but otherwise it's a really good article. ~K 22:29, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

I agree, this is close. I would also like to see a short section on reactions to help students learning organic chemistry, otherwise it's very close.Walkerma 00:35, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

• Chembox filled out now. Fully agree to A-Class. Wim van Dorst 10:01, 17 July 2005 (UTC).
  • Agree with Martin, a touch more organic chemistry would be useful—I didn't see any reference to electrophilic substitution for example! Hazards section could do with a peer review, as it is missing some important references. Still, we're pretty close here. Physchim62 10:59, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Indole

K has been very busy on this, and others have added pieces. Is it A-class yet? If not, what still needs to be done? I would say a short safety section, and possibly a short uses section- though indole itself doesn't have many real-world applications that I know of. A few pertinent comments here could help it graduate to A-class. Walkerma 05:37, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

• This is getting into the right direction, I agree there. But I would like some information on Uses of the stuff and perhaps some (large scale) Production info? IMHO current status: B-Class. Wim van Dorst 20:47, 28 August 2005 (UTC).
  • I agree with Wim, it is still "B-class with potential". Just the sentence "Indole is no a base like aniline" would deny it A-class in my books: this sentence should be rewritten or removed. I will do a safety section for it, and I will see where I got to on uploading the biosynthesis of indole. If we can't find any use for indole itself, we need to rejig the article to point out its importance as the parent molecule (formally, if not synthetically) of many very useful compounds. Physchim62 08:59, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Preliminary classified as A-Class, with remarks

These articles have in the first assessment process of all articles on the worklist of the Chemicals Wikiproject been classified as A-Class. Later scrutiny have shown open issues still to be resolved before full compliance to A-Class classification. Unless these issues are dealt with, these articles are recommended to be re-graded to B-Class, by September 2005.

• I have re-assessed all the still open items, with updated status. My proposal is to do this weekend the administration on the ones that have no problems anymore IMHO (at present unless contradicted soon: Acetic acid, Ethanol, Folic Acid, H2O2, Toluene) and the ones that have to be removed from the Worklist (DNA, Protein), and do the administration on the problematic ones next weekend. Wim van Dorst 21:55, 26 August 2005 (UTC).
  • 1,3-butadiene, acetone, carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, methanol, testosterone, and water (molecule) have been demoted from A-Class to B-Class. The pertaining discussion has been archived (see above). Wim van Dorst 20:01, 2 September 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Phosphorus trichloride

While re-assessing the worklist, I found these two little gems. Compliments to most WP:Chem contribuants, as I see from their history lists that many people contributed. For me, A-Class material. The corresponding phosphorus pentachloride is just a redirect to the catch-all phosphorus chlorides and thus still needs a lot of work. (Or we may drop it from the worklist?). Wim van Dorst 14:41, 24 October 2005 (UTC).

• not opposed, so they're A-Class now. Wim van Dorst 23:13, 2 November 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Phosphoryl chloride

While re-assessing the worklist, I found these two little gems. Compliments to Martin, as I see from its history lists that he contributed significantly. For me, A-Class material, as is commonly so from him. Wim van Dorst 14:41, 24 October 2005 (UTC).

• not opposed, so they're A-Class now. Wim van Dorst 23:13, 2 November 2005 (UTC).

[edit] 1,3-Butadiene

Well done article now. Good work of Shimmin. Wim van Dorst 20:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC).

Still a B class, IMHO, though what Shimmin has done is very nice work. I think it still needs firstly a structure/MO diagram. I always teach this in Organic II, butadiene is the simplest example of a conjugated system. Secondly, I think it should have some chemistry - again this is stuff covered in organic II, things like the addition of HBr at low and high temps giving different products (kinetic vs thermodynamic products) make the chem quite interesting. Walkerma 07:36, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

• No significant change since 12/1. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 17:30, 5 March 2006 (UTC).

A-Class now. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:13, 18 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Sodium hydroxide

Blimy, this is an improvement over the last assessment (Start). A big chunk of work by Martin, and a lot of tweaking by numerous others. Really A-Class now, I'd say. Wim van Dorst 21:21, 23 January 2006 (UTC).

Yes, at least it's not so embarrassing now! Still needs a bit of work and a little more content, IMHO, but a fresh pair of eyes is needed - I've looked at it too often! I'd like to see worldwide industrial info (why does Kirk-Othmer only give US data?). As with sulfuric acid, it needs PC to do the safety stuff. I'd really love to get a picture of the Alkali pub in Jarrow, UK, built in 1876, if we can confirm that it is named after a nearby NaOH factory. Any Geordies on this project? Just a quirky idea of mine... Walkerma 22:57, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

• The pub is a nice idea. An alternative is to put a picture of the Wadi Natrum oasis in: wasn't natriumhydroxide named after it? Wim van Dorst 23:04, 24 January 2006 (UTC).

A-Class now. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Sulfuric acid

This one has been close to A-Class for quite some time. Is it there now? Wim van Dorst 21:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC).

This was last assessed as B-Class because of lack of refs. I have a little more to add from Kirk-Othmer; then I'd like to see it given the PC Hazards treatment before it gets to be A-Class. Such an important compound needs to be a long and comprehensive article to meet the A-Class criteria - is there anything important still missing? Are there any other good refs we can use as sources? Walkerma 22:32, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

• There are several serious references now. And I don't see anything obvious missing. Wim van Dorst 22:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC).

A-Class now. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Ozone

While reassessing the worklist again, I noticed that now Ozone is becoming a fairly nice article. The Chemistry section could need some help, but all in all a good article at least. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC).

• After having been GA-class for quite a while, it was demoted from GA back to B, at which level it still is since November. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Aspirin

Mainly pharmaceutical content - but this looks pretty good to me. Then again biochemistry isn't a strong point of mine. Do others agree this should be an A-Class? Walkerma 03:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:What is a featured article?, Images should have concise captions.^[?]
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 81 mg, use 81 mg, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 81 mg.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.^[?] Specifically, an example is 325 mg.
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.^[?]
• Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout.^[?]
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • “In the year [of] 2000”
• Please provide citations for all of the {{fact}}s.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)