 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Chemoselectivity
editIn the first diagram, why is the alcohol group on the LHS not oxidised?
- Oxidation of the diphenylcarbinol portion of the molecule is not favoured for a number of reasons. Firstly the electronic and steric properties are vastly different to the 1,2-diol moiety. Oxidation would only yield a carbonyl (unless extreme forcing conditions were employed - in which case other reactions are also implied). Most importantly the oxidation mechanism involves intimate interaction with the diol to deliver the oxygen. (This explanation is off the top of my head without rechecking, but gives a rough simplified explanation I hope). --WhirlwindChemist (talk) 14:48, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- Good catch - the first rxn is probably wrong.--Smokefoot (talk) 17:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- Oxidation of the diphenylcarbinol portion of the molecule is not favoured for a number of reasons. Firstly the electronic and steric properties are vastly different to the 1,2-diol moiety. Oxidation would only yield a carbonyl (unless extreme forcing conditions were employed - in which case other reactions are also implied). Most importantly the oxidation mechanism involves intimate interaction with the diol to deliver the oxygen. (This explanation is off the top of my head without rechecking, but gives a rough simplified explanation I hope). --WhirlwindChemist (talk) 14:48, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
TPAP
editGiven the relative brevity of the Ruthenium tetroxide and TPAP articles, and given the level of overlap, would there be a case for combining the TPAP info into RuO4 page? --WhirlwindChemist (talk) 14:48, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- Most editors in the Wikipedia chem space seem to like focused articles. You can expect these two to grow and mature.--Smokefoot (talk) 17:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
CAS report
editAs of today, 1356 articles, patents, etc report on RuO4, 638 appearing since the year 2000, of which 21 are reviews. We should stick with reviews per WP:SECONDARY. Otherwise we end up citing obscure papers like McMurray, H. N. (1993). "Uniform colloids of ruthenium dioxide hydrate evolved by the surface-catalyzed reduction of ruthenium tetroxide". The Journal of Physical Chemistry. 97 (30): 8039–8045. doi:10.1021/j100132a038, which has been cited a grand total of 4 times in the past 23 years.--Smokefoot (talk) 11:16, 24 May 2019 (UTC)