User talk:Flergeron
|
Thanks for that. I appreciate somebody offering tips to a first-time user such as myself. -- Flergeron 00:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
AsOBr[edit]
I am trying to figure out what reasons you might have started an article on this species. According to my sources, the AsOCl, which one might expect to be more prevalent, has only been known since the 70's and has never attracted much interest. It is a polymeric species. So the oxybromide is not the kind of thing many would ever ever encounter. One way to handle such esoteric species is to convert the ultrashort article into what we call a "redirect" which basically shunts the reader to a more complete context. I recommend that it be redirected to oxohalide, which is a very good article.
I could find only one article dedicated to AsOBr (published in Polish, which is a bad sign). Overall, this compound is extremely obscure. Other editors might challenge the reason for the existence of the article that you started. I have had this challenge also.
If you decide to use the redirect method, go into the editing mode, the find the wiki toolbar called "Wiki markup" and test it out.
If you are looking for things to do, probably the best way to get going is to find a good textbook on a topic you like and then check to see if the fact in a wiki-article correspond to the claims in the textbook. Presently the articles on most chemicals are pretty solid but there are many quirks where you could be useful in the areas of applied chemistry, related to the use of chemistry in everyday life in pollution, cooking, power generation. Good luck,--Smokefoot (talk) 13:50, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
I made it a necessity to include external sources that include the physical properties concerning the compounds. I assumed that I would create the articles as they were red linked, but I'll see what I can do. Thanks for the clarification. --Flergeron 14:20, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- I converted this article a redirect. There is just insufficient information on AsOBr. Your drawing was serious misleading. Although I am sure you have good intentions, maybe hemistry might not be your thing in Wikipedia at this stage. There are many other places where your dedication and skills can be used, so I hope you stick with it.--Smokefoot (talk) 19:45, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
I researched Arsenic oxybromide and I modeled the structure as shown but instead with the ball and stick model and in 3D. An example I referenced to was on this website: wtt-pro.nist.gov. Several other bromide compounds possess similar structures. --Flergeron 20:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- AsOCl, which is better known, is polymeric as one might expect (no As=O, per the double bond rule). The NIST image must be computed. NIST is a good resource of physical properties, but physical chemists and physicists often care little about structure and often misrepresent such. We used to get such strange images all the time in Wikipedia, but most have been replaced by structures based on X-ray crystallography. The Polish paper I mentioned above actually did not even have AsOBr, but adducts of it. And these were not crystallographically nailed down (hence the minor journal for the publication). Bismuth oxychloride, officially isoelectronic with AsOBr, illustrates the polymeric structures in this area. I always encourage people learning an area to stick to chlorides, which are almost always better characrterized than bromides and iodides. You could see what you can find on SbOCl and POCl. We have no article on POCl (but POCl3 is well characterized and rather useful). I would bet that someone has tried to make POCl and that it adopts an interesting structure. If you want to read on this area, get a copy of Greenwood, N. N.; & Earnshaw, A. (1997). Chemistry of the Elements (2nd Edn.), Oxford:Butterworth-Heinemann. ISBN 0-7506-3365-4. Sort of the bible for this area. --Smokefoot (talk) 00:39, 11 June 2012 (UTC)