Talk:Partition coefficient

Chemistry High‑importance

	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.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pharmacology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology 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.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

First sentence

As a non-medicinal chemist who came here to find the difference between logP and logD, I found the first sentence confusing: as written, it sounds as though they are the same thing. This is clarified in the next few sections, but I think the first sentence needs some editing for clarity. I saw all the aggro on this page so I think maybe it's best if I just highlight this and leave you to it?! FlowerFaerie087 (talk) 04:48, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed in this edit. In the context of the general definition contained in the first sentence, the partition and distribution coefficients are essentially the same thing. They differ in what exactly is being measured (neutral vs. all species respectively). Also this distinction is normally made only for liquid/liquid equilibria and the scope of this article is wider than liquid/liquid equilibria. The difficulty is that the lead needs to be kept dead simple and it is nearly impossible to provide both an easy to understand and complete definition in one sentence. At the same time, the lead should provide a summary of the entire article. Instead of trying to define everything at once in the first sentence, I have state what the difference is in the third sentence. Is this OK? Boghog (talk) 07:36, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Citation formatting

@Mikhail Ryazanov: Per WP:CITEVAR, there was a previously established citation style in this article. Unless you obtain consensus on this talk page, you should not change it. Also why are removing |department= from the citation templates? Boghog (talk) 20:54, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is using |department= to indicate whether something is WP:PRIMARY vs WP:SECONDARY a standard use for that field? It is not as {{cite journal}} defines its meaning. DMacks (talk) 02:03, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal: Merge Octanol-water partition coefficient into this article

Consensus not achieved for merger, so each article has been improved with relevant content: thanks Littleb2009. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:12, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There is a lot of overlap between these articles and Octanol-water partition coefficient currently contains mostly the mathematical details rather than the real-world applications. I propose that any non-duplicate content be merged here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:48, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The overlap should be reduced, but the articles should not be merged. The octanol-water partition coefficient is a key parameter in environmental chemistry (environmental fate, bioaccumulation etc.), pharmaceutical sciences and drug design (Lipinski's rule of five). --Leyo 00:01, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely agree that the octanol-water partition coefficient is the key most-used parameter. Indeed I would go so far as to say that this is what chemists think of when they hear the words "partition coefficient". The issue is what the Wikipedia article about this should have as its title. At present, the article with the OWPC title is not doing the subject justice, while the PC article is quite good, in my opinion. Although it quite reasonably mentions other solvent pairs note that it sends readers to blood gas partition coefficient for a more detailed account and its almost exclusive focus is on the OWPC. So the proposal to merge the two. As Wikipedia makes extensive use of re-directs, the consequence will not be to lose either title but merely to send readers to a single comprehensive article. If you wish, Leyo, I'd be quite happy to retain the title OWPC and make PC a disambiguation page for that title, BGPC title and any other uses such as briefly mentioned here and more extensively at solid solution, for example. Comments? Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:32, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would propose to describe the general concept as well as other solvent pairs in Partition coefficient. A summary on the OWPC should be retained here, but the rest should be moved to Octanol-water partition coefficient in my opinion. --Leyo 23:53, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Leyo that this article should discuss partition coefficients in general, and have a brief summary on the OWPC, and that the OWPC article should be kept (and if necessary improved) to discuss that topic in detail. I would generally support a merger if the subtopic is either the only part of the main topic that is at all relevant or notable, or if there just isn't enough to say about the subtopic to justify a whole article about it. In this case, I don't see that either of these is the case. --Slashme (talk) 11:15, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that there should be a section on the octanol-water partition coefficient in this article but it should have a "main page" link to the actual page on the octanol-water partition coefficient. I'm going to go WP:BOLD and do it unless someone points out an issue with my idea by May 1.

I think that might not be a good idea. It should be completely merge or no merge at all. Littleb2009 (talk) 16:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning the merger, I don't have any strong opinion one way or the other, but I wanted to point out that PC originally was and still is mainly focused on OWPC. Boghog (talk) 18:25, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's already June 1. I think maybe having a section on the octanol-water partition coefficient may be a good idea after all.
I'm going to close the discussion soon. littleb2009^{Have a chat?} 15:40, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think it became obvious that there is no consensus for a merger. --Leyo 19:27, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have finished with adding a section on the octanol-water partition coefficient. --littleb2009 (^she/_her) (talk • contribs) 16:28, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Timber

Does log signify log₁₀ or ln? catslash (talk) 17:40, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Throughout the article, log is indeed log₁₀. If you believe this needs to be mentioned at its first use, please make that addition. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:31, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the swift reply. A base of 10 did seem most likely, by analogy with pH and most (though not all) logarithmic scales. catslash (talk) 00:37, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Done) catslash (talk) 01:32, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]