Talk:Triazene
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Inorganic or organic compound, or both ?
{{Inorganic-compound-stub}}??? The functional group clearly deals with organic chemistry and is not an inorganic function ! See Golden Book and Reference N°2 !
The pure NH2N=NH chemical compound is very rarely encountered in inorganic chemistry. So, {{Chemistry-stub}} is more gereral and free of ambiguity. Shinkolobwe (talk) 13:53, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
- "pure NH2N=NH chemical compound". We dont discuss impure compounds very often, you mean "parent". Re inorg vs organic, we have a moron loose who relabels the stub category.--Smokefoot (talk) 16:13, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
talk Dear user, please avoid edits lacking value nor adding useful information. watch the language please! talk The page discusses Triazene from every aspect with a focus on its role as a functional group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:6E00:10F1:7901:980E:F0B2:748C:26C5 (talk) 21:35, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
- The organic derivatives have been moved to triazenes. And actual reviews are cited. 1,3-Diphenyltriazene has also been created.--Smokefoot (talk) 21:52, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks Smokefoot, are you able to identify/find any references on this parent compound? My searches only find derivatives! Nothing of the statements in the article have references. Only the ids are referenced. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:59, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Graeme: I looked and looked. The parent is mentioned in Greenwood and Earnshaw's textbook, but only in terms of the name, no chemistry. No reviews of the parent could be found. There is an old JChemPhys paper that describes a calculation. It is surprising that astrochemists do not discussed it. It never came up when I taught inorganic. --Smokefoot (talk) 11:12, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for that, as our article makes several claims about a coloured gas with unpleasant odor, and some kind of boiling point is claimed even, but nothing to prove any of that is true. Could this all be fabrication or original research? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:16, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
- Oh, maybe youre correct: that is all rubish. I just checked the Germans. They have refs that I cannot access but they dont say anything about color or odor or b.p. These binary hydride articles once were once the objects of obsession, so many of us avoided them. Maybe the suspect content should be removed. --Smokefoot (talk) 11:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for that, as our article makes several claims about a coloured gas with unpleasant odor, and some kind of boiling point is claimed even, but nothing to prove any of that is true. Could this all be fabrication or original research? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:16, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Graeme: I looked and looked. The parent is mentioned in Greenwood and Earnshaw's textbook, but only in terms of the name, no chemistry. No reviews of the parent could be found. There is an old JChemPhys paper that describes a calculation. It is surprising that astrochemists do not discussed it. It never came up when I taught inorganic. --Smokefoot (talk) 11:12, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks Smokefoot, are you able to identify/find any references on this parent compound? My searches only find derivatives! Nothing of the statements in the article have references. Only the ids are referenced. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:59, 3 June 2019 (UTC)