Talk:Oxidation number

This redirect 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.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles

Elements

This redirect is supported by WikiProject Elements, which gives a central approach to the chemical elements and their isotopes on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing this redirect, or visit the project page for more details.ElementsWikipedia:WikiProject ElementsTemplate:WikiProject Elementschemical elements articles

"as the Stock Number"

It is my understanding that it is still know as the Stock Number, furthermore it is endorsed more by the international body that governs nomenclature becuase it is more practical to use.

The reference is given at the bottom of the article: IUPAC recommends the term "oxidation number". Physchim62 (talk) 10:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fractional oxidation numbers

What about superoxides? According to my textbook (Oxtoby), oxygen can have an oxidation number of -1/2 - Reddaly

That's because you have two different oxygen atoms: one with oxidation number zero, and one with oxidation number -1. The average oxidation state is -1/2. Itub 23:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone perhaps make this simpler? At least try and and bring it down to a High School Honors Level. Thanks greatly.

169.244.21.235 17:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Much of it already is taken from an Irish High School textbook.... Physchim62 (talk) 14:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

71.34.67.202 has repeatedly vandalized this page with the word "elephant". I don't have time to figure out how to ban right now, anyone know how?Dsouzaj 18:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted and warned again (does not yet warrant a block). Femto 18:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this article is not simple, basically because it is unclear. What is meant by "central atom" if you have something as simple as HCl? Don't try to give a general definition without a few simple examples. Then give a more complex example where someone can see how "central atom" is invoked. As currently written the reader has to be able to read the author's mind. This article, by not being clear, requires that you already know what the definition is, and therefore is above that of High School Honors Level. WMSwiki 19:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rules in article

Rules 5 and 1 appear to contradict each other. '''Styrofoam1994''' 01:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is more or less correct now.Lim Wei Quan 11:15, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Location

What is the relationship between the Oxidation Number and the location of the Elements on the Periodic Table? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.97.186.130 (talk) 15:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Central

What's a "central atom", as referred to in the first paragraph? Rojomoke (talk) 18:12, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Various assignment methods and CO2

I think this article needs a mention of how biochemists and others tend to use simpler schemes of assigning oxidation numbers. Also, isn't the carbon in C02 considered to have an oxidation number of 4 not 2? It's more oxidized because of the double bonds.

Furthermore, there needs to be mentioned the difference between something's oxidation number and the oxidation number imparted onto other elements.--69.91.133.41 (talk) 01:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where does this article say that the oxidation number of C in CO2 is 2? I don't know what you mean regarding the biochemists and the "number imparted onto other elements". Perhaps this is covered at oxidation state? --Itub (talk) 08:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Not to be confused with oxidation state."

Although this heading seems to imply the opposite, oxidation state is identified to be the same as oxidation number in the elements template. Can someone rectify this? --The Cowdestroyer (talk) 03:49, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Coordination compound, coordination chemistry ,

and a picture of ethane. This article should merge with Oxidation state again. --80.212.73.51 (talk) 23:01, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion reigns

The first line stating that "charge that it would have if all the ligands were removed along with the electron pairs that were shared with the central atom" is contradicted by the later section. The IUPAC definition for oxidation number is essentially the first line of the article. The IUPAC definition of oxidation state and the rules for calculating it have been put in the body of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.26.62.85 (talk) 16:09, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Article

Please, login or create an account for the purpose of editing articles. Because numerous people may be on Wikipedia from your ISP, messages left by bots about edits being reverted are displayed for any number of possible individuals from that ISP. As any user from your ISP loads this Wikipedia page without a login, these bot messages are automatically displayed whether they are the individual to whom the message applies or not. If you don't login, how can we possibly give credit where credit is due for edits? Sandhillman (talk) 21:14, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

I started out trying to make changes but in the end I have rewritten the article. I have tried to remove the inconsistencies, add references and give a little history, the section on spectroscopic oxidation state I kept unchanged- it needs more work from someone more familiar with the topic. I hope I have been successful. I have had help from another wikipedian in this but all of the mistakes are mine. Most of the confusion in this area I believe can be laid at IUPACs door, as their Gold Book definition of oxidation number referring exclusively to coordination compounds, reads as if it replaces the use of the term in naming conventions that IUPAC had been recommending since 1940. Being charitable this was an unfortunate oversight as the 2005 inorganic red book still uses the term in naming. Axiosaurus (talk) 10:12, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What are these Roman numbers?

https://www-s.nist.gov/srmors/viewTableH.cfm?tableid=19

-- Rainald62 (talk) 10:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly they make no sense as oxidation numbers: Cu I to Cu XI makes no sense chemically. Such high oxidation (or ionization) states occur only in the interior of stars, and not for solid samples distributed by NIST. Perhaps sample number or product number or batch number? None of which relate to this article. Dirac66 (talk) 19:57, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]