Chemistry Template‑class

This template 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 Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

When using the "automatic" formula method ({{Chembox Properties|C=2|H=5}}, the results appear to display according to Hill order (C...H...everything-else-alphabetically). It's actually generated by an inner template: {{Chembox Elements|C=2|H=5|Cl=1}} gives:

When there are no carbons, Hill says H goes in its place strictly alphabetically. But {{Chembox Elements|B=1|H=3}} gives:

still "C/H first". DMacks (talk) 02:17, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And now I see this was already discussed last April here (#Hill system). But that answer sounds like the implementation has changed, or else I'm misunderstanding...something. There, the problem was that Hill was not being applied because NOCONSENSUS for inorganics (presumably "contains carbon" for this context?). But now it looks like it is being applied, but is being misapplied for inorganics that happen to contain hydrogen. But {{Chembox Elements}} has not been changed in any relevant way since that discussion. @Edgar181: could you explain or clarify what you were remembering (or what you can now re-determine)? Regardless, we should figure out what's happening now and document it (possibly after changing what's happening now if we don't like it). DMacks (talk) 04:43, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't follow yet. DM writes: "Hill was not being applied because NOCONSENSUS for inorganics". But in #Hill system, Edgar181 writes "there is consensus to use the Hill system for organic compounds, but not necessarily for inorganics". So Edgar writes that there is consensus to "not necessarily" us Hill in inorganics. If we take Edgar's wording as the rules to be applied here at enwiki, it is not illegal to have "H" opening an inorganic formule. And currently, the Chembox implies the rules correctly in that it uses the freedom of "not necessarily" to the effect of '... but by my choice I do'. So in inorganics, Chembox puts H as a prefix. ({{Chembox Elements}} does not check for organic/inorganic, not now and not in ).

Topic limitation: for organics, Hill's rule is applied and there is no issue. Also, when an editor enters a |Formule= it is by the editor that the sequence is set. OTOH, shouldn't this issue also include "C when no H is present" (as an inorganic formule)?

Moving forward now. I understand that DMacks proposes to apply Hill's rules for inorganics in Chembox. There is no explicit discussion into non-/consensus found. I don't think we should to rely on memories. IOW, we can discuss DMacks proposal. -DePiep (talk) 09:44, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that I do not know what standard calls for H first in inorganic cases. That is, are we actually following a common method from chemical literature? I agree that we are not currently using hill for inorganics, and I accept that there might be no consensus to do so, but I'm trying to understand the basis for what we are doing. DMacks (talk) 14:32, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clear, and in fewer words. Let's forget what we do/did. Let's base our guideline on what Hill system says. But the linked article is bad (incorrect & incomplete even). I cannot get the 1900 Hill text. Anyway still, we best aim at "use Hill". -DePiep (talk) 23:45, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Molecules have triple points, and they also have critical points. Those points represent when there is enough pressure for all 3 states of matter to exist, and when there is enough pressure that the gas and liquid states blend together, respectively. So can somebody add those parameters? DSCrowned (talk) 04:02, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You mean: triple point, by two parameters: pressure and temperature. And Critical point (thermodynamics) can be multiple for a substance ? (added question mark; DP). Which which ones should we include, and which parameters go with that? Also, is there a need to add it? -DePiep (talk) 16:21, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've just copied all relevant templates to cy, I should think a good 80 of them. It looks good and thanks to all for really hard work. Just a suggestion: can you please keep in mind the other languages when creating the next draft! There must be a way of creating a file of all relevant templates that could be 'dumped' into another language wiki. If only life was that simple - I suppose I want it on a plate! Thanks again. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 19:47, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please clarify. Did you copy the whole {{chembox}} set? (that is more like 146 subtemplates, see Category:Chembox templates)? Did you translate the (English) parameters like "| |IUPACName=", and why would that be a problem? In general, I do not understand what changes you would like to the English {{Chembox}} (next draft). If it helps inter wiki translation, we sure can do that. -DePiep (talk) 20:33, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

cy is Welsh. cy:wikipedia has Latin script. -DePiep (talk) 20:40, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We have some 125 element infoboxes (see Category:Periodic table infobox templates). I have prepared changes to change the box into a wiki-standard {{Infobox}}. See Change_Infobox_element_to_use_{Infobox} for an overview and comments. Some questions are open.

You can check your favorite element for changes (e.g., fluorine). An all-parameter demo is here. -DePiep (talk) 13:27, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have finalised the new version, it is about ready to go live by now. Check some value-formatting or element showing if you like. If you have any questions, ask me.

To compare: (page Template:Infobox <element>/testcases):

• H
• He
• Li
• B
• C
• N
• O
• F
• Al
• P
• Ti
• Fe
• Zn
• Ge
• Y
• Nb
• Tc
• Ag
• Xe
• Cs
• Lu
• Ir
• Au
• Hg
• Pb
• Po
• At
• Fr
• U
• Pu
• Bk
• Cf
• Rf
• Cn
• E117
• E118
• E119
• E120
• all up test
• full index by PT
• This list: []

. -DePiep (talk) 10:32, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In "Solubility in water", water links to water; I suggest it should be changed to properties of water, e.g. in {{Chembox Properties}}:

[[water]] → [[properties of water|water]]

Christian75 (talk) 21:42, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For {{Chembox}}, {{Chembox Properties}} is the single place to edit indeed (AFAIK). Note that {{Infobox drug}} has this data element too. -DePiep (talk) 23:20, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done in {{Chembox Properties}}: [1]. No changes in {{drugbox}} by this. DePiep (talk) 23:36, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be possible for each CAS No (and indeed for each value for every 'identifier') to start on a new line? Currently the text wraps, which leads to problems when the CASNo_Comment option is used, or even worse problems when it's used for some enties but not other. For example: Copper(II)_sulfate - I know the formatting behind chembox, so I can figure out what referes to what, but our readers most certainly can't. --Project Osprey (talk) 13:24, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]