Talk:Oxidation state
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Johnjbarton in topic Claims that Greenwood and Earnshaw are wrong
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Oxidation state article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 2 years  |
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | Oxidation state was nominated as a Natural sciences good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (April 26, 2021). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
 | The contents of the Oxidation number page were merged into Oxidation state on 18:04, 1 July 2013. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
| The contents of the List of oxidation states of the elements page were merged into Oxidation state on 14:54, 22 March 2019 (UTC). For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
 | Text and/or other creative content from List of oxidation states of the elements was copied or moved into Oxidation state. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Image correction
editI have added a correction to redox equation 1 which was pointed out by DIRAC66 in 2017 but which I missed until nowMcardlep (talk) 08:28, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Mcardlep: thanks! I don't see which old discussion it is, but I assume the relevant change is O.S. on the carboxyl carbon in the product? If so, I can tweak the SVG. DMacks (talk) 12:01, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, thanks for fixing this image. I also cannot find what you say is my previous comment, but I note now that the real problem with the previous version is that the supposed acetic acid was missing an oxygen, so we were showing the oxidation of acetaldehyde to ... acetaldehyde!??? Of course this incorrect equation was unbalanced in number of oxygens as well as charge. I am glad you have the required software to fix the diagram. Dirac66 (talk) 15:21, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Done. I didn't draw out the O–H bond because that detail is not really relevant to the point being made here (and it's a harder edit for me to make:) DMacks (talk) 12:02, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, thanks for fixing this image. I also cannot find what you say is my previous comment, but I note now that the real problem with the previous version is that the supposed acetic acid was missing an oxygen, so we were showing the oxidation of acetaldehyde to ... acetaldehyde!??? Of course this incorrect equation was unbalanced in number of oxygens as well as charge. I am glad you have the required software to fix the diagram. Dirac66 (talk) 15:21, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
IUPAC definition
edit"Several criteria were considered for the ionic approximation:
- Extrapolation of the bond’s polarity;
- from the electronegativity difference,
- from the dipole moment, and
- from quantum‐chemical calculations of charges.
Point b may be deceptive: in CO the negative end of the dipole is C; in pyrrole the dipole vector points from N to a direction in the middle of the ring. Patrizio 93.147.230.142 (talk) 16:28, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Claims that Greenwood and Earnshaw are wrong
editSeveral footnotes claim errors in Greenwood and Earnshaw, but not all such cases are backed by alternative sources. Johnjbarton (talk) 23:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)