Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sodium carbonate.svg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image is wrong, the electrons should not be delocalized. Correct structure can be seen here http://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/summary/summary.cgi?cid=10340 Götz (talk) 02:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are already two files with the correct structure, [1] and [2]. --Götz (talk) 03:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide a rationale. PubChem is certainly not a reference here. --Leyo 09:01, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete The electrons probably are actually delocalized on en:Category:Carbonate ion in general, and in agreement with various other cited analytical images in Category:Sodium carbonate. And it's also true that sometimes/often it's not drawn that way, which is also acceptable in some contexts, as in the proposed replacements. However, if they are delocalized, the charge must be –2/3 on each of the three O, not –1 (the total carbonate must be –2). DMacks (talk) 14:20, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Info May I ask why w:PubChem is not a valid reference? Here are other references, ChemSpider (from the w:Royal Society of Chemistry), ChEBI, Chemical Abstracts Service (from the w:American Chemical Society). In all these it can be seen that the electrons are not delocalized. --Götz (talk) 18:38, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 I withdraw my nomination The file is now fixed, based on [3] without the implicit electrons. --Götz (talk) 19:09, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Concur that it's now fixed and is now a non-redundant high-quality image usable in some contexts. DMacks (talk) 03:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Per discussion. Leyo 18:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]