Talk:chemical property

Definitions

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)

RFD discussion: July–October 2022

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.

---

chemical property

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)

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)

• 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)