Talk:Silicic acid
 | This article was nominated for deletion on July 21, 2018. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | On 13 July 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to Silicic acids. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
Contested deletion
[edit]This article should not be speedy deleted because it was nominated for deletion on July 21, 2018. The result of the discussion was keep. --BlackBony (talk) 21:47, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- No, incorrect. The article which was kept was named "Silicic acid". That is not the name of this article. Wikipedia does not, in general, name articles after plurals. Elizium23 (talk) 21:56, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- No, correct. Please read WP:PLURAL. But I agree with you that it is better to do via a requested move. BlackBony (talk) 21:59, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Requested move 13 July 2022
[edit]- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 12:38, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Silicic acid → Silicic acids – per WP:PLURAL. Blocked sock. // — Relisting. Favonian (talk) 21:36, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Articles on groups or classes of specific things.
BlackBony (talk) 22:02, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Probably could have been a WP:RM/TR. HouseBlastertalk 22:47, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
reconsider. The parent acid has been well characterized recently, something that few or no other editors seem to be aware of. So I recommend just leaving it as is, the parent compound. We could include a section on the various condensed derivatives..--Smokefoot (talk) 15:41, 14 July 2022 (UTC)there is no any parent compound. This is the general name for a family of chemical compounds containing the element silicon attached to oxide and hydroxyl groups. This family is called silicic acids. BlackBony (talk) 19:40, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Blocked sock.
- This seems to be a fairly common naming style in this area: Oxyacid, Mineral acid, Solid acid, Binary acid, or for that matter, Acid. All of these could be considered articles on groups or classes of things, but this does not seem to be the standard interpretation of WP:PLURAL. Dekimasuよ! 01:49, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
- Relisting comment – For some reason, this article was not made part of WP:WikiProject Chemicals, so I fixed that and this discussion should be listed on the project page some time tomorrow. Maybe that will draw an audience. Favonian (talk) 21:41, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. While I'm on record of supporting plural titles where they make more sense, this does not seem to be the case here. Per Dekimasu, the title can be interpreted as a category of compounds rather than a closed set. Perusing the titles in Category:Chemical compounds, they are invariably singular even in cases when they denote a (presumably) finite set of compounds, beginning from acid and base (chemistry) and drilling down into Alkylpyrazine, Alkanolamine etc. In fact, I just rewrote the lead to define the subject in singular, which as I believe flows better. No such user (talk) 08:45, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
- Strong support. Now that we have an article on the parent orthosilicic acid, it makes sense to have an article on the family.--Smokefoot (talk) 12:54, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
- Sigh. This is not an AfD; we had one in 2018 and the article was kept. The question here is whether to have the title at a singular or a plural. I've demonstrated that we always singular for chemical compounds, and no reason has been given why this one should differ from acid. No such user (talk) 08:42, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry: I wasnt paying sufficient attention. I support the plural, but dont really care that much so long as the redirects are set and the article starts with a big shout out to the orthosilic acid, which is the only one (except editors) any cares about. The singular should redirect to the ortho acid in my opinion. The topic is sort of archane, so not big deal.--Smokefoot (talk) 12:55, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
- I have added a reference to Orthosilicic acid to the intro and noted that this request was filed by a blocked sock. Overall, I now oppose the move itself. Dekimasuよ! 04:15, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry: I wasnt paying sufficient attention. I support the plural, but dont really care that much so long as the redirects are set and the article starts with a big shout out to the orthosilic acid, which is the only one (except editors) any cares about. The singular should redirect to the ortho acid in my opinion. The topic is sort of archane, so not big deal.--Smokefoot (talk) 12:55, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
- Sigh. This is not an AfD; we had one in 2018 and the article was kept. The question here is whether to have the title at a singular or a plural. I've demonstrated that we always singular for chemical compounds, and no reason has been given why this one should differ from acid. No such user (talk) 08:42, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
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.