Talk:Lead(II) sulfate

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.
 

Untitled[edit]

  • Lead (II) sulfate just tech data DJ Clayworth 14:53, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
    • What's wrong with having technical data? The page needs work but I don't see the need to delete. theresa knott 15:28, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
    • Keep; but needs re-write into plain English, plus some background - when was it discovered? What is it used for? Is the current version a copy vio? Who can't spell "sulphate"? ;-) Andy Mabbett 15:46, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
      • IUPAC? -- Karada
      • Keep. Sulfate is acceptable; more correct in my experience (maybe American/British thing?) sulfate/sulfide - Marshman 20:09, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
      • It is, of course. Maybe I need to follow Andy around explaining his humour. In the UK we have sulphur/sulphate. Secretlondon 20:13, Nov 28, 2003 (UTC)
      • American periodic tables say sulfur. (Keep the page, BTW.)Wiwaxia 11:08, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • It's a copy vio, and actually a copy vio of a UK site. Maximus Rex 07:16, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)
    • Keep, it's fine enough now and will undoubtedly get better. It's not a copyright infringement. It's ineligible for copyright protection under US law - factual data with a presentation which is esentially controlled by standards in the business. See Online service provider law#Copyright law protects creativity. Read the full text of the Westlaw decisions to get some idea for where the law draws the line on creativity. Jamesday 05:04, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • Keep. Title needs to be changed. Daniel Quinlan 17:08, Dec 3, 2003 (UTC)


IUPAC, ISO, and Americans say "sulfate".-- The Anome 22:43, 3 Dec 2003 (UTC)

  • Indeed. When the names of the chemical elements were finally standardized (late 1980s), it was the American spelling that won for sulfur (and the British spellings for aluminium and caesium). Physchim62 14:07, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Even in UK, the official spelling is now -f- and that is taught in schools/academia. I propose to remove the rejoinder in the heading section about British spelling.--Mevagiss (talk) 17:49, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Right, see WP:SULF. In chemistry it should be always sufur. Sulphur may be appropriate when translating Dante's "Inferno". Stan J. Klimas (talk) 23:24, 4 July 2014 (UTC)