Talk:Hydrogen iodide

Definitions

The sentance "Once again, although chemically related, hydriodic acid is not pure HI but a mixture containing it." is not really necessary. all acids are of this nature, the very definition of acid is 'a substance in an aqeous solution'. Now, i can see the point of listing that HI is normally 98-99% or whatever was listed, but i think the sentance above should be removed and just say, "according to the definition of acid(and then we will put a link there), HI contains little water in solution." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.246.10.183 (talk) 21:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

HI solubility in water

Under 'Properties of hydrogen iodide' it says: "One liter of water will dissolve 425 liters of HI [...]" Isn't it a bit unclear what is meant here (bear in mind I'm no chemist)? Is it 425 liters of (gaseous) HI at 20 degrees celsius? Gaseous HI has, I presume, a fairly low density which would mean 425 liters of HI isn't very much.

425 is quite a lot, assuming normal pressure and temperature. It is almost 20 moles, or more than 2 kilograms. --Itub (talk) 14:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It's HI gas - I've checked the source, and it makes sense to me as a BS.c. in chemistry. I added "gas" after "... 425 liters of HI ..." 77.212.171.42 (talk) 10:27, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

425 litres of any gas is not meaningful without further qualification. You should include ideally density (e.g. molar density per litre) or temperature and pressure (e.g. SLC: 25deg C @ 1 atm). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.146.136.8 (talk) 09:30, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Comment from article

I leave it to others to outline the chemical formula for this reaction.

Unsigned comment left in the article, moved here by Ziggurat 01:29, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me this article falls into a 1st year chemistry trap: at one point it seems to overlook the fact that when an acid is dissolved into ions, it does not protonate. The proton simply does not exist freely in solution. Instead, we observe the hydronium ion (H₃O⁺) and the equation must include water for it to be a balanced equation as a result. I'll alter it and leave you all to pick at it :) Mattabat 22:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Those equations, as fixed up, look a little mangled in Internet Explorer! - I'm going to leave them however as they are correct (and look good in Firefox). Guess Internet Explorer needs work.. Mattabat

Dissociation energy of HI

Silberberg's Chemistry, 4th edition, lists the bond energy of HI as 295 kJ/mol, which means a photon of wavelength ~406nm will cause a molecule to break. Where was 578nm obtained from in this article? Also - why does wikipedia distinguish betwen dissociation energy and bond energy? No text I can find distinguishes them, and several specifically state they are the same. 169.233.62.35 18:55, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Article status

I have made a few additions to the article, mainly adding a few organic reactions of HI with ethers and alcohols, and also a section on use of HI in making methamphetamine. I am wondering what parts of the page you guys think still need much work, I would like to see this in the B class sometime. Dffasd (talk) 02:33, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

This is way beyond "start" in my opinion, so I've rated it B. --Itub (talk) 14:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Density

The density given in the infobox (2.85g/ml at -47 degrees(why this temperature??)) seems to be much too high for a gas; the German article has 5.8g/l at 0 degrees Celsius, which seems much more reasonable. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 19:44, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I just noticed that HI is a liquid at -47 degrees, so the value given might be right. Still, the density at 0°C (or maybe 20°C) would be more valuable for the infobox, IMO.--Roentgenium111 (talk) 19:47, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Formation via phosphorus

Why does the equation have water on the reactants side and water in the same form on the reactants side? --Cheminterest (talk) 20:36, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

HX (g) vs HX (aq)

Why are our articles on HF, HCl, and HBr split along these lines, but not that on HI? Double sharp (talk) 01:47, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hydrogen iodide. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061006211537/http://www.camd.lsu.edu/msds/h/hydrogen_iodide.htm to http://www.camd.lsu.edu/msds/h/hydrogen_iodide.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 10:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

The shape is more like a lightbulb.

Due to the "I" being larger than "H". Alfa-ketosav (talk) 11:39, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Consistent grammar wording

Hey everyone, what are your thoughts about changing the lead sentence in some articles of non-organic chemical compounds to be seemed consistently? I have made two changes to this article and was all restored. Do your mind agree with the form: [Chemical compound name] is an inorganic chemical compound; it has the formula [Chemical formula symbol], link the word formula and bolden the formula symbol? 14.185.203.27 (talk) 14:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Any dicussion are opened in this page. Notify me about what coming up in your opinion. 14.185.203.27 (talk) 14:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

@MicrobiologyMarcus What's your point of view? 14.185.203.27 (talk) 14:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

And more from, @Tollens, @Hoary, @Mike Turnbull 14.185.203.27 (talk) 14:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

MOS policy at WP:CHEMNAME says that bold in lead is reserved for common names not used in the article title (see Phenol), and the chemical formula should instead be displayed with the {{Chem2}} template. microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish•growths)} 14:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Proposing: Hydrogen iodide (HI) is a diatomic molecule and hydrogen halide. microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish•growths)} 14:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose inorganic chemical compound as it is simple and unnecessary and removes useful descriptors as diatomic molecule and hydrogen halide. microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish•growths)} 14:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I agree your point. But I have to say that I might make the article inconsistent; therefore, readers cannot get the fact in a balanced way. 14.185.203.27 (talk) 15:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

To my mind, I think the inclusion is not important and it is a factor that keeps audience confused as it is a little adundant. 14.185.203.27 (talk) 15:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

From my experience, readers may definitely know what hydrogen halide is; therefore, we shouldn't explain what this chemical compound relate to or a halogen gas. 2001:EE0:4BC2:C190:74A5:B633:51B2:265D (talk) 02:54, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@MicrobiologyMarcus, I think there is no need to wiki-link the formula. 14.185.203.27 (talk) 15:02, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

No worry, turn the formula to apply the template 14.185.203.27 (talk) 14:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

@MicrobiologyMarcus, I need to gain consensus first and follow the agreement. 14.185.203.27 (talk) 14:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Your statement at the top of the section says you want to make wide changes to leads concerning multiple articles. You should first not seek consensus about that on this talk page about one article, but instead start an RfC at the Village Pump (proposals) section as it will have an effect on multiple articles, and allows other editors to weigh in. microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish•growths)} 15:12, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

I have to seek consensus from many other editors to start the change from the agreement among ones. @MicrobiologyMarcus 2001:EE0:4BC2:C190:74A5:B633:51B2:265D (talk) 02:46, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I have attracted attention from other editors as I tagged some influenced for the Wikipedia community to involve in and participate the discussion. Just to be all articles written in a consistent, and polish format. 2001:EE0:4BC2:C190:74A5:B633:51B2:265D (talk) 02:50, 29 November 2023 (UTC)