Talk:General Chemistry

Karl, can you do some grams to moles conversions ? -James

Stoichiometry
I think that stoichiometry would fit into the scope of this wikibook (it's meant to be an wide introduction). I learned about it in Chem I. If no one else can, I'll try to recollect it. Regre7 20:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Naming Convention
This is an early Wikibook that was developed before "standard" naming conventions were in place. I would like to get some input about what, if any, naming convention ought to be used to "fix" this Wikibook. New contributors to Wikibooks are making mistakes and adding "articles" to this like if it were Wikipedia.

My preference would be to move to the standard "/" naming convention. If there is no objection in about a week or so, I will be doing exactly that for this Wikibook. --Rob Horning 11:16, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

The transwikied article at has been dewikified and I assume needs to be moved to a real name somewhere in this project. 64.126.24.12 20:38, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Pointless
Are contributors even considering the likely knowledge base of readers - this is supposed to be an introductory text in general chemistry so wherein lies the sense in assuming any reader of a text at this level would have any clue about the behaviour/attributes of 'standing waves on a a guitar string'....

I dont think this text is compehensible to its intended audience.

more naming convention stuff
I made some pages, and named each module like General_Chemistry/(unit)/(subunit). I noticed that nobody else did that. Should move mine to General_Chemistry/(subunit), or change everyone else's? I personally think that the more organization, the better. Hoogli 21:57, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Merge with "High School Chemistry"
Since High School Chemistry consists of a brief, incomplete introduction, and this book is also woefully incomplete, I vote yes to merging them. I believe there to be little difference between a high school text and an intro level college text. We should be erring on the side of readability anyway, I think. --Dolsson5 16:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * These two books could be merged, but may need un-merging in the future. A high school text assumes much lower ability with math, reading, familiarity of concepts, etc... Even the audience is different. High school chemistry covers the topics everyone should know, even if they never intend to use chemistry in any way. College general chemistry should be a broad overview for potential chemistry majors (as the starting point of their career), science and engineering majors (as a knowledge base for other technical pursuits), or non-science types who have a college degree and should have a more deep understanding of science than the random guy on the street.


 * Long story short:, if we merge these books it will definitely end up looking like an ADVANCED high school text.Zolot 00:33, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, sorry to be coming to the table late on this discussion. I have been gathering a group of chemistry professors at major US state universities for the purpose of creating this wikibook on General Chemistry.  The group is NOT interested in merging with high school chemistry because the project will already be very large.  Including high school material could cause it to collapse under its own weight.  With the group's consent, I will begin to reorganize the chapters a bit, create an extended outline, and invite experts to start completing each chapter with content.  Thanks for your patience. --Wight 14:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


 * In view of the foregoing, I change my vote to NO. --Dolsson5 05:53, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Since it has been a while and all commenters are in agreement, I am calling it consensus and removing  the merge tag. --Dolsson5 06:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Structure of this module
I am confused. The page General Chemistry has a table of contents that links to a few very poorly laid out pages. However also below this article are stuff like General Chemistry/Introduction. That has a TOC template that leads to lots of other pages. I added that template to the top of General Chemistry. It seems as if there are two structures mixed up together. What is going on? --Bduke 04:04, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I've update the TOC of the book to match the structure of the modules and existing sections. It should be much more clear now.  There's still some problems with the locations of the articles ("thermodynamics" gets its own directory, everything else is in the same directory as the book root? is this convention?), but otherwise it should be cleared up. VSEPR 07:46, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

This book needs work
I think it's lame that such an important book is in need of so much work. Whenever I have a chance, I'll do what I can to fill in the blanks and fix typos. Most of the pages in this book are only a few sentences long right now.

It looks like most edits are from '06 and '07. Is anyone out there gonna help finish this book with me?

NipplesMeCool (talk) 01:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Update: At this point, it looks very polished. However, it needs way more examples and practice problems (with answers) to be useful. Also, the order of the chapters is a bit unhelpful. I think several chapters should be rearranged. Last, it lacks details in several sections (I'm not going to list them). -- NipplesMeCool (talk) 01:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Active Authors
I'd like to join any current editors on this book, are any of the past authors still active? --Btharper1221 (talk) 17:12, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll be working on the existing sections as time permits, hoping for another active author but it looks like this has been in the works for a while. Clockworkcity (discuss • contribs) 20:09, 5 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I am watching this book, so i'll see all edits and remove spam if spam would occur. I am glad to see someone is working on this wikibook, though i don't have the time to contribute myself. Thank you --Johannes Bo (discuss • contribs) 08:44, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Cover picture caption
I changed the caption of the cover picture to read "a 4f orbital" rather than "an atomic 4f orbital". The original is just meaningless. I presume the picture is of a one electron (hydrogenic) 4f orbital.

What is pollution
2 105.112.161.191 (discuss) 14:04, 14 July 2022 (UTC)