Talk:Amide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Chemistry (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Untitled[edit]

This page seems to talk about molecules containing peptide bonds, but there are other amides out there, like dimethylformamide HCON(CH3)2 or sulfonamides or tertiary amides. AxelBoldt 19:12 Jan 23, 2003 (UTC)

AxelBoldt is right, there is not enough information on the differant types of amides. This article just focus' on seconday amides. It should include information on primary and tertiary amides aswell. This would help clarify the differances between the peptide link and an amide. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.137.80.110 (talk) 07:22, 15 June 2006

Also, I'm not so sure you can synthesize an amide from a carboxylic acid unless it is under enzymatic catalysis.

yes you can, you just have to heat it very hard. The ammonium salts of carboxylic acids on heating will give amides, if you heat them even harder with P2O5 then you get nitriles.Cadmium

I really think there should be more of a distinction between amides with a carbonyl group and amides such as lithium diisopropyl amide. I thought all amides had a carbonyl group until i ran across LDA. Eddietoran 19:23, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

H two zero[edit]

The removal of water under the reaction arrow, denoted -H2O, actually has a 0 (zero) instead of O (the letter for oxygen). Could whoever made the reaction scheme picture please fix this? done! V8rik 21:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Amidation redirects here, but it's not really explained. (And I don't know enough to write about it myself.) MarcelM 17:15, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Facile amidation[edit]

As per the described direct amidation of carboxylic acid with amine in presence of catalyst (Rheuthenium based), there is a better and cheaper method reported in Org. Syn. 2005, which is also far more 'green'. This describes use of Boric acid in 5 mol% quantity, with azeotropically removing water. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chinu687 (talkcontribs) 03:38, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

only organic?[edit]

I'm sure there are a lot of amides like sulfamide without any carbonyl function. Only amides from carboxylic acids are "organic". Sadorkan (talk) 15:20, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Although the specific compound called sulfamide, H2N-SO2-NH2, is inorganic, there are other amides without a carbonyl group that contain carbon and are also organic. Yes, non-carbonyl amides (amides not of carboxylic origin) should be mentioned also in this article. H Padleckas (talk) 20:17, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Main "amide" page should discuss all meanings, not only the one in organic chemistry[edit]

I second the above criticism, and I'm tagging this page as confusing. See more on my explanation for the same problem for "imide" page, the talk page at Talk:Imide#Main_.22imide.22_page_should_discuss_all_meanings.2C_not_only_the_one_in_organic_chemistry.

12.104.156.31 (talk) 18:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree. Besides the previously mentioned sulfamide (and its organic N-substituted relatives), there is the inorganic phosphoramide OP(NH2)3 (and its organic N-substituted relatives), sulfonamides R-SO2-NR'2, phosphonamides R-PO(NR'2)2, and who knows what others. H Padleckas (talk) 20:17, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Well I am partly responsible for this predicament, which is a matter of expediency and reflects the fact early Wikipedia focused on really big topics before getting to more specialized ones. The article follows our template for an organic functional group. Here are some options for addressing the omission of sulfonamide-phosphoramide etc:
  • Suggestion 1, retain this basic article but add a paragraph that explains the nomenclature for organic amides, phosphoramides, sulfonamides, and has links to each. Note we already do this for the NH2- meaning of amide.
  • Suggestion 2, convert this article to a disambiguation page that points to articles devoted to conventional organic amides (not sure that they are called), phosphoramides, sulfonamides, etc. This idea accommodates the "specialty amides" but 99+% of amides are of the RC(O)NH2 variety in everyday life (IMHO).
  • Suggestion 3, which seems unworkable, introduce subsections within each section pertaining to synthesis of ..." "occurrence of ..." for phosphoramides, sulfonamides, etc.
  • Other idea?

--Smokefoot (talk) 00:43, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I advocate Suggestion 1 for now, which some Users have already started to implement. This article is less than 15000 bytes, leaving plenty of room for expansion - later into Suggestion 3. When the article finally becomes unworkably long (if ever), it could become a lists page, somewhat similar to a disambiguation page, thus approaching Suggestion 2. Unlike a true disambiguation page, a lists page could have discussion and summaries of each of the topics. There are already articles on sulfamide and sulfonamides. H Padleckas (talk) 04:34, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Figure in "Structure and bonding" section[edit]

I think something is wrong with e- movement, bond rearrangement and charges in the figure in the "Structure and bonding" section ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.226.107.5 (talk) 12:13, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Those are resonance structures, not a chemical reaction. This is not clearly explained in that section, and an explanation should be added. Given the fact that those are resonance structures, they are correct. H Padleckas (talk) 21:26, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Pronunciation contradiction[edit]

The audio and phonetic don't seem to match. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.130.25.152 (talk) 20:44, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Having noticed this myself, I've tagged the article with {{Contradict-inline}} so that hopefully someone who knows which is the "correct" pronunciation can correct it. According to the OED 11th ed., both the pronunciation transcribed in the article /ˈæmd/ and that spoken /ˈmd/ are acceptable, but I have no expertise on the subject and so don't feel justified in making the edit myself. D4g0thur 10:02, 28 August 2012 (UTC)