Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals

Would anybody be willing to help me spotcheck this GA? I tried to do it myself, but I couldnt figure out anything the sources were saying. I took it up intentionally not knowing about chemistry, so an average person could understand the article, but I didnt consider that I wouldnt understand any of the sources. :/ Finnfrog99 (talk) 21:36, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Late response, but I just want to make sure that everyone is aware that the review has passed (yay!) so no help spotchecking is needed.

UnbihexiumFan (talk | contribs) 02:32, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:C286#Requested move 18 July 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 1isall (talk | contribs) 01:17, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

We have a ton of Category:Set index articles on molecular formulas. They are fairly formulaic, with the page-name as the molecular formula (plain ASCII, no formatting) as the page-name, and then:

1. Sets {{DISPLAYNAME}} to use proper subscript format when displaying the page title itself
2. Sometimes, a nav-box for adjacent molecular-formula articles ({{Related molecular formulas}})
3. Intro sentence with:
   1. The molecular formula with proper subscript format
   2. The molar mass
   3. The single-isotope exact mass
4. A list of articles of chemicals with that formula
5. Footer ({{Molecular formula index}})
6. Categories based on the structure

Items (1) and (3.1) are identical and are mechanically derivable from the page-name by simple string parsing, but they are each hand-written separately in the page source. Items (2), (3.2), and (3.3) are mechanically derivable from the page-name, but they are each hand-written separately in the page source and require calculations to parse apart the formula. Item (5) includes a feature for passing a parameter to set the page-title with formatting, but defaults to not doing anything at all.

I propose we automate a lot of that.

Quick-start/lightweight proposal: have the footer template automatically set DISPLAYNAME by default. Templates know the name of the page calling them and {{Format molecular formula}} properly formats an ASCII formula with subscripts, so it's easy to implement. That means we can scrap (1).

Longer-term/heavier proposal: have a template generate the intro sentence. As with quick-start, it wouldn't need to be passed anything in order to do (3.1). We do have {{Chem molar mass}} do (3.2), but it requires passing each element's atom-count separately (parsing apart the formula string). If we can do that parsing, it would be easy to clone {{Chem molar mass}} to do (3.3). Item (2) also wants each element separately, so that could roll in here as well, replacing all of (2) and (3) with a single template-call with no parameters. If parsing apart the formula string is too complicated, we could pass each element separately as parameters to this new template, which would still be a major simplification over the current situation.

Happy to work on it (or hear additional thoughts, or if anyone knows helpful parsing templates I couldn't find easily)... DMacks (talk) 22:28, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

Huh, I wrote Module:MolFormIndex a few years ago, which parses apart an ASCII-string molecular formula into each element and its count:) DMacks (talk) 05:51, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Intent to deploy {{Molecular formula index top}} as the intro sentence. See C3H7Br for an example of its effect (executive summary: looks the same as long as whoever manually calculated the molar mass used the current WP-standard values) and this diff for the change to implement it. I plan to request a bot-run in a few days to upgrade the set of pages unless someone objects. DMacks (talk) 07:33, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Intent to deploy {{Molecular formula index/sandbox}} to set DISPLAYTITLE automatically. Again, see C3H7Br. Therefore, I plan to request a bot-run to remove the explicit setting in each page. DMacks (talk) 07:47, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

 Done. And I cleared Category:Molecular formula index with explicit DISPLAYTITLE formula, finding zero discrepancies (Category:Molecular formula index with explicit DISPLAYTITLE formula same as default was empty). DMacks (talk) 01:19, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi, there are also some molecular-formula pages in Category:Pages with DISPLAYTITLE conflicts now (but not too many relative to all the transclusions). — Peterwhy (talk) 20:30, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

Yup, that's part of the next cleanup pass. Thanks for keeping tabs on the lint! DMacks (talk) 20:51, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

Twelve were truely redundant, one was a 16+-year typo (now fixed), one was a duplicate of another page (now redirected), and one was a true conflict where neither was correct (now unified and corrected). So that was even more productive than I had planned:) DMacks (talk) 00:00, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:1,2-Propanedithiol#Requested move 20 August 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:17, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:1,2-Propanedithiol#Requested move 20 August 2026

User:~2026-46755-05 is adding many references to real or potential uses of diverse organic compounds: propargyl bromide, mandelic acid, some nitrobenzene derivatives. Many of these refs are primary and many are older, e.g. 1960's. Evidence of authentic use is lacking, aside from these compounds being synthetic intermediates (virtually all simple organic chemicals are synethetic intermediates in some sense). So, I am asking for advice - are these contributions helpful, i.e. broad information that Wikipedia aspires to provide? Because I have started to undo some of these elaborate additions. Medicinal chemists routinely conduct a lot of synthesis that doesnt work out and does not significantly advance the drug development (although their ultimate goals are worthy of course).--Smokefoot (talk) 21:17, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Indeed. I can't really see how additions like Propargyl bromide@11:19, 28 August 2026–05:21, 31 August 2026 are an improvement. (I reverted this one, happy to discuss if needed.) Preimage (talk) 11:58, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

An editor has requested that White liquor be moved to another page, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. Avocado (talk) 13:52, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

Can anybody with expertise please add sources to show notability? Thanks in advance. Bearian (talk) 04:20, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I've added several sources and expanded the content of the article. This is my first time working in a WikiProject in any capacity, so please do let me know if this was an acceptable edit and/or what to improve. Thanks! Blu Adi (talk) 14:08, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

An editor has requested that 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid be moved to 2,4-D, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:42, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
(Notification provided by Move+)

Could somebody please help us by adding sources to this stub? Thank you in advance. Bearian (talk) 03:34, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

@Bearian As is usual, Pubchem has a list of references. doi:10.1007/7355_2014_40 is open-access and mentions the compound briefly. I struggle to see how the compound meets WP:GNG. The way the stub has been written, its main claim to fame seems to be as a substructure of some drugs but surely WP:NOTINHERITED applies if that's all that can be said. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:50, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing. Bearian (talk) 14:16, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

Hi everyone,

there seems to be an error with the brackets in the structure image (topmost image), which includes two oxygens instead of one for the repetition (see formula below in ChemBox). Compared to "Simethicone" with a correct formula this stems from the pseudo-3D presentation, but I do not have access to a program to edit this myself.

Thank you! Xamanoth (talk) 14:27, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

Yes, you're right. The brackets are misplaced in File:PmdsStructure.svg, so I switched to another existing image that has them in the correct place. Innerstream (talk) 01:23, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, that's perfect! Xamanoth (talk) 10:41, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

I just had a look at 4-Phenylazepane and noticed that the CAS number was wrong (we were giving the hydrochloride), which obviously meant that most of the other IDs were wrong because we mostly rely of CAS lookup. I've added the correct values and used the Index parameter to keep the keep the old ones with a 'hydrochloride' lable. So far, so good. But I can't repoint the ECHA or CompTox links. In fact, I can't see ECHA or CompTox parameters in the chembox markup, but they're there on the normal page. What is going on? Project Osprey (talk) 10:08, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Chemboxes automatically pull these from linked Wikidata pages: see the "ECHA Substance Infocard ID" and "DSSTox substance ID" parameters at d:Q4637194. Preimage (talk) 10:38, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Right, I see. CompTox seems okay. ECHA may be unfixable because they're using the wrong CAS number too. Project Osprey (talk) 10:50, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

I've noticed a lot of chemical equations on articles (especially older articles that haven't been edited in months or years) use the older-looking chem2 template instead of the chem template. The former renders it like regular text while the latter, more like LaTeX.

For instance, I edited a metal halide article earlier today and you can compare the two most recent revisions, 15 months apart, to see what they look like.

Should we be standardising equations across articles with the more modern-looking chem template or leave them as is? Blu Adi (talk) 13:11, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Switching to a mixture of fonts within an article does not look modern or more-standardized to me. WP:MATHCHEM, referencing Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Chemistry, says not to use <chem>...</chem>. DMacks (talk) 13:52, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Got it, thanks! I'll revert the changes I made then. Blu Adi (talk) 14:10, 11 October 2026 (UTC)