Talk:Skeletal formula

Chemistry Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article 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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Additional picture?

Just a thought, if anyone wants to agree/disagree - since this is all about skeletal formulae, should we have an atom labelled formulae with it? (for example File:Escitalopram-nonskeletal.gif)

Could be an interesting contrast, yes. You forgot the fluorine, though :) Any chance the image could be saved as a PNG? GIF is not really the best format. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bond Line Formula

Skeletal Formula is also known as bond line formula. Should there be a redirect or some other notation indicating this? Nilboarder 04:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drawing skeletal structures by computer

What program is everyone using to draw the 2D skeletal formulas anyway?

See molecule editor for some possibilities.

Ben 18:18, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Funny little "crossed line"?

This crossed line business is HORRENDOUS - certainly not acceptable in the ACS style and I'd be surprised to find it acceptable according to IUPAC. If you used that notation at Cal, you'd be laughed out of the room! I've read thousands of articles in the field and have never in my life seen that notation before encountering it here today. If it's not supported by citation which shows it to be approved according to IUPAC then I'll be removing it later in the week. FOR SHAME!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.82.154 (talk) 07:28, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In sinigrin there's a crossed-over bond to the nitrogen; I'm not sure what this is and this article, although finally explaining the "squiggly line" even my chem teacher couldn't explain, was not helpful. If anyone can explain what the crossed-over bond means (I suspect it means CN?) perhaps it would be a nice addition to the article. WnC? 17:36, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll write a bit about it tomorrow. The crossed bond means undetermined or deliberately ambiguous E/Z stereochemistry at the double bond, i.e. it could be either E or Z or a mixture of both.

Ben (talk) 00:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for clarifying! WnC? 12:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis Formulas

I don't agree that the ethanol structure identified as a "Lewis Formula" actually is a Lewis Formula. A Lewis Formula, as noted elsewhere in the same article, shows the shared electrons comprising a bond as dots, not as lines. The convention using lines to represent chemical bonds was systemitized by Emil Fischer in the Fischer Projection Formula, wherein the horizontally depicted bonds around carbon project out of the plane of the page and the vertical bonds project behind the plane of the page. Although Fischer applied this specifically to chiral molecules like sugars and amino acids it is correct also for achiral molecules like ethanol. Prostaf2alpha (talk) 04:39, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ASCII-art formulae?

As an alternative to graphical representative of the skeletal formulae, you can with some success represent it using ASCII characters, like this:

Caffeine

   CH3
    |
  N_|_N  O
 // || \//
 \N_||_N/\
 /        CH3
H3C

This is not a very accurate and detailed method of representation, but you can use it for your purposes when you are unable to show a picture or draw a diagram of the formula. How about adding this to the article? Anton Pirogovski (talk) 18:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Skeletal diagrams are reversed!

My apologies. I finally found an introductory online text that clearly explains it doesn't matter which way the diagrams are drawn, as long as they're consistent. I'm so used to counting from the left.

I'll update the page with this information.

Cephas Borg (talk) 04:02, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What's being illustrated in this diagram from the Pinene article?

Can someone explain the isometry that this is illustrating? The solid/dashed lines in the ring are what confuse me; is this illustrating that the ring is non-planar, and its angle relative to the plane? --BlueNovember ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:57, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pn, Hx, Hp, Cy

Never seen these before. Sources please? Double sharp (talk) 16:34, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]