Talk:chemical property
Definitions
[edit]Candidate definitions:
Nr | Definition | Note |
---|---|---|
1 | A characteristic of matter that describes a process which will change one set of substances into a new set of subgstances having different specific and general physical properties than the original set of substances if it occurs. | Present upon the creation of the article. |
2 | A characteristic of matter that describes a process which will change one set of substances into a new set of substances having different specific and general physical properties than the original set of substances. | The defition uopn creation, adjusted. |
3 | Any of a material's properties that becomes evident during a chemical reaction. | First Wikipedia's definition. |
4 | Any quality that can be established only by changing a substance's chemical identity. | Second Wikipedia's definition. |
I have just replaced 2 with 3. --Daniel Polansky 10:54, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/Green_check.svg/55px-Green_check.svg.png)
The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Inqilābī wanted to rush this through (diff) based on the shaky "consensus" in Wiktionary:Requests_for_deletion/Non-English#propriété_chimique. I felt like there was no good reason to ignore due process and take that discussion as sufficient justification to speedy the English entry, especially considering that @Theknightwho has expressed uncertainty about this entry while @Binarystep said they would vote to keep it here. See also Talk:chemical property. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 13:03, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
- Abstain for now. The German chemische Stoffeigenschaft potentially qualifies for THUB. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 13:03, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry for the premature deletion. I still think this is SOP, though, so delete. PUC – 13:10, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
- Abstain for now - I have no strong feelings about the entry. Keep as a THub if there are any languages that use non-SOP terms for it, but otherwise delete. Theknightwho (talk) 13:14, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. The term doesn't literally mean "a property of a chemical", since it refers to something that can only be observed after a chemical reaction rather than simply analyzing a substance, so it arguably passes WT:FRIED and/or WT:PRIOR. Additionally, its inclusion in Merriam-Webster and Dictionary.com builds a strong case for invoking WT:LEMMING as well. Binarystep (talk) 13:16, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
- It might not mean "property of a chemical" (nominal chemical + property), but it does mean "property relating to chemistry" (sense 1 of adjectival chemical + property). I fail to see how the manner in which those properties can be determined / brought to light has lexical relevance. PUC – 14:01, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
- That ambiguity justifies keeping the term per WT:FRIED: "For instance, a fried egg is pan fried, not deep fried, and also not scrambled." Binarystep (talk) 14:16, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
- It might not mean "property of a chemical" (nominal chemical + property), but it does mean "property relating to chemistry" (sense 1 of adjectival chemical + property). I fail to see how the manner in which those properties can be determined / brought to light has lexical relevance. PUC – 14:01, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per Binarystep (specifically the WT:LEMMING & WT:PRIOR points). AG202 (talk) 14:03, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. An SoP not essentially different from such SoPs as physical property, material property (as in, the value of a commodity is not a material property of the thing), immaterial property (as in, the mind is an immaterial property of the brain), intrinsic property, ... , most of which can have different meanings (like immaterial property in intellectual property right, or intrinsic and extrinsic properties in physics versus intrinsic and extrinsic properties in philosophy). --Lambiam 09:26, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: seems quite SoP to me; doesn’t appear to be a term of art. — Sgconlaw (talk) 13:22, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per Binarystep. Thus, per WT:LEMMING[1]. And this is no obvious SOP: "Any of a material's properties that becomes evident during a chemical reaction". This def is not synonymous to "property relating to chemistry"; the latter phrase is broader.
And someone has asked 'What does "chemical property" mean? What are some examples?'[2]; why did they ask if the term is such an obvious sum of parts?--Dan Polansky (talk) 17:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)- @Dan Polansky: I've struck out part of your message. Let's do without specious arguments, please. PUC – 12:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- Striking out was frowned upon by others in RFD; please don't do it again. My argument is fine; you are free to remain unconvinced. I won't unstrike it though to avoid a silly fight. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:13, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Dan Polansky: I've struck out part of your message. Let's do without specious arguments, please. PUC – 12:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- RFD kept: 4:3 for deletion; no 2/3-supermajority consensus for deletion; multiple months have passed. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:13, 31 October 2022 (UTC)