From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Chemicals (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.


There are a lot of facts on this page that aren't referenced ( definition that was referenced has none of the dates or other info). Bfesser 03:22, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

The purpurin article has some refs that also bear on alizarin. Someone might someday copy them here... --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 23:42, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Lake based on other metals[edit]

I edited the paragraph on Field. Some changes might still be needed, as the statement: "By 1804, the English dye maker George Field [...]. Over the following years, it was found that other metal salts, including those containing iron, tin, and chromium, could be use in place of alum to give madder-based pigments of various other colors." might be incorrect. The addition of other metal salts seems more like the typical re-discovery of something that was in use in the past. Giuliano. HumphUK 14:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps, perhaps not. I suspect that salts of tin and chromium were not commonly available before modern chemistry, so their use in the cloth dyeing "industry" seems unlikely. Iron salts were more commonly available (see iron-gall ink for instance), but just because they could have been added it does not follow that someone did think of adding them. On the other hand, calcium compounds such as quicklime have been common "industrial products" for millenia (e.g. for curing hides, pickling olives, etc.) so the accidental discovery of calcium-based lakes is not surprising. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 23:42, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Madder lake deserves its own article[edit]

Also, why is madder lake redirecting to Alizarin? Madder lake should have an entry on its own with pictures (I have some nice ones if necessary). Giuliano. HumphUK 21:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I believe that the article would definitely stand on its own. If you create it, I will provide the applause. 8-) All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 23:42, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Check the Rose Madder article, it seems to be the oil painter's name for madder lake. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 01:53, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
I agree- Madder Lake should be its own page. Technically, "madder Lake" is the name of the pigment, and "Rose Madder" is the name of paint made from that pigment. Since most of the material on Rose Madder pertains to the pigment, I suggest the we rename Rose Madder to "Madder Lake", remove the redirect from "Madder Lake" to Alizarin, and set up a redirect for the term "Rose Madder" to the (newly re-named) "Madder Lake". I'll start a discussion of such on the Rose Madder talk page so this discussion can continue there. Autumnalmonk (talk) 01:13, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Rename as 1,2-Dihydroxyanthraquinone?[edit]

Should the article be renamed "1,2-Dihydroxyanthraquinone"? I am not voting for it, just asking. (I moved "purpurin" to 1,2,4-Trihydroxyanthraquinone because "purpurin" is also the name of a protein. That excuse does not exist in this case.) All the best--Jorge Stolfi (talk) 23:42, 29 January 2010 (UTC),

capitalization of dyes and pigments[edit]

How should pigments and dyes be capitalized? E.g., should the dye be called "alizarine red", "Alizarine red", or "Alizarine Red"? Some articles capitalize pigment names, as in "Alizarine Crimson" or "Rose Madder Genuine". How standard is this practice? --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 02:14, 30 January 2010 (UTC)