Talk:Adams' catalyst
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Article Status
[edit]What else needs to be done to transform this from a stub to an article? dil 15:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think it could use some expansion on the catalysis (picture and catalytic cycle, maybe?), though I do feel like removing the stub-mark, and to clasify it as a start. So not much. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Warning
[edit]A caution needs to be added to this article as platinum black (which is formed during a reduction with Adam's catalyst) can catch on fire when exposed to air or when mixed with other organic chemicals. Fires have occurred when metal catalysts are exposed to plastics.--theslave (talk) 03:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes a cautionary comment is appropriate, but Wikipedia usually does not offer advice.--Smokefoot (talk) 03:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Added Reduction
[edit]I added an equation to show the reduction of PtO2 to Pt as Pt is the actual active catalyst for the reduction. Added reference for reduction. Great catalyst works really well!--theslave (talk) 02:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- My understanding is that the catalyst is probably not Pt, but some ill-defined oxide. The Pt Metals Review does not offer much help, although the reference is useful in some ways. The nature of the catalytic species has not been determined to my knowledge. It would be useful to have a semi-modern review on the nature of the catalyst. Possibly eEROS.--Smokefoot (talk) 03:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok added a reference. Although it is in ionic liquids. It is difficult to study under normal conditions at least to obtain kinetic data. The references in the article refer to Pt(0) metal self assemble into bulk metals in organic solvents. I will look at adding a catalytic cycle but it will not be much different than normal hydrogenation. No review available that I saw anyway. --theslave (talk) 23:58, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- In Wikipedia, relatively low priority is accorded to primary references (journals), see WP:secondary. Like most encyclopedias, the emphasis here is on reviews and books, the specialized references being primarily reserved for historical purposes. Although well intentioned, your gesture to look into the Pt vs PtOx theme is unlikely to be fruitful. In any case, good job on this article.--Smokefoot (talk) 01:54, 24 June 2010 (UTC)