Talk:Dibasic

This disambiguation page 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

Disambiguation

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Please don't delete[edit]

Hey,

The point here is that there's already a good definition on wiktionary:dibasic. If you want to add to the definition, please do so there - wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. -Zeus-^u|c 02:10, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article was just created. It needs to be expanded. I created it because there was a red link to it. The topic is worthy of having a Wikipedia article. — Reinyday, 02:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Why is this valid?[edit]

I dislike this term with a passion. It misleads students into thinking these compounds have a proper alkaline capability. Unlike weak, acid salts, with an actual and small acid capability. Acids like sulfuric act as bases only in extreme conditions the misleaded students will probably never face. Can someone defend the usage of this term? Sulfuric has two -OH groups, yes, but it doesn't dissociate that way. Most of the time it sends protons into something else. Not hydroxide ions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.226.196.180 (talk) 03:09, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]