Commons:Deletion requests/File:Acetic acid group black.png

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.

File:Acetic acid group black.png

• File:Acetic acid group.png

Incorrect structure: H missing on left hand side. Leyo 22:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

 Delete both chemically wrong as given. These are some derivative of acetic acid, or an acetic-acid-like group attached in a special way for some unidentified context (not the usual "acetate" bonding pattern, for example). Their use-case is where the left-hand oxygen is attached to some other structure in a different image (this whole thing is an R-group), but that only makes sense or is knowable when accompanied by context that says (for example) "the red O is the point of attachment", and the entity is definitely not an "acetic acid group". This image does have valid use, salvageable by renaming ("2-oxyacetic acid" or so) to prevent confusion about what it is ("acetic acid" is a common lay-reader topic, important not to mislead into thinking that this is that). Even better would be to include a bond-fragment off the O to illustrate "something is attached here" rather than it appearing like a chemical mistake and to clarify where exactly something is attached ("2-oxyacetic acid" is only correct if the O is indeed the attachment point). it:Arsenozuccheri#Ossoarsenozuccheri dimetilati has a table with a ton of these incorrectly named structure diagrams. DMacks (talk) 04:23, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

DMacks is right, it is used as a "R" derivative in the tables of it:Arsenozuccheri, maybe before proposing some images for deletion it's better to watch where they are used and why, so it can be easily understood their purpose. I support DMack's suggestion to rename it with another, less-misleading name, and to clarify in the description its use. --Superchilum^{(talk to me!)} 10:00, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Why not replacing the “O” by an “R” then? --Leyo 08:36, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

er.. no... the O-etc part is the R-part in images like this one. I hope I explained it well :-) --Superchilum^{(talk to me!)} 14:57, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Not good enough for me, I'm afraid. --Leyo 11:50, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

mmh let's try in this way:

1. take File:DM-Oxoarsenosugars.svg
2. instead of "R", put File:Glycol group black.svg
3. you obtain File:Arsenosugar glycerol.svg

better? :-) --Superchilum^{(talk to me!)} 19:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I know what an “R” stands for. However, I don't see a reason for using an “O” instead of an “R”. --Leyo 20:07, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

so, you would like to put "R-CH2COOH" instead of "O-CH2COOH" ? --Superchilum^{(talk to me!)} 08:21, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, absolutely. “O” stands for oxygen and nothing else. --Leyo 08:56, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, exactly. But that "O" is not a circle, a strange symbol or whatever: that's an oxygen!! That's why you can't replace it with a "R". Have you seen these tables? --Superchilum^{(talk to me!)} 09:11, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Then, it need to be “–O–”, “R–O–” or similar. Just “O–” gives an chemically incorrect impression. --Leyo 09:47, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

if you write "-O-CH2COOH" it's ok, but with structural formulas the "-" can be a methyl group, which is incorrect as well. If you agree we can just delete the "black" versions, keeping only the images with the red atom for purposes like the tables I've linked before. --Superchilum^{(talk to me!)} 12:48, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

This bond might be drawn in a dashed way or in color. --Leyo 13:19, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

mmh, why not? Maybe half of it can be unbroken (the half close to the "O") and the other half dashed (which should connect the ring). In this way there is no need to keep the atoms colored, and we can only keep the "black" versions. --Superchilum^{(talk to me!)} 13:52, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

IUPAC 2008 drawing guide (doi:10.1351/pac200880020277) explicitly blesses a bond ending at a wavy-line to represent the edge of an undefined structure (like File:Acyl group.svg, though really-technically the bond should not continue beyond the wavy-line but just end at it according to their examples), and explicitly forbids use of a dead-end normal bond to represent an attachment. A nonstandard valence (unsatisfied by normal rules, such as O without H) means "an atypical valence state" and "might...represent a radical center or charged atom" and that Ph–O "represents the PHO group" but does not specifically bless this as a clear way to represent attachment points. DMacks (talk) 21:55, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

ok, so we can just put a bond+wavy-line on the left of the O-atom, is it correct? --Superchilum^{(talk to me!)} 09:23, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I think you got it. Just do it for one image and post it here. --Leyo 13:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

---

Deleted: Looks like the files are being redrawn for factual accuracy. Deleting these files as a matter of housekeeping. FASTILY ^(TALK) 08:18, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

sorry for the delay, I was away. I will make all these kinds of images modified, I only need some days, so please don't delete them before we can improve them. Thanks. --Superchilum^{(talk to me!)} 13:03, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I think that we are done now, right? --Leyo 00:57, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks done to me...all it:Arsenozuccheri#Ossoarsenozuccheri dimetilati entries have been replaced by corrected images, Commons:Deletion requests/Files depicting wrong chemical structures are all resolved, and I don't see any remaining problematic items in Special:ListFiles/Ele_piloni_krati. DMacks (talk) 18:47, 24 November 2012 (UTC)