Talk:Chemical impurity

Chemistry 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Materials Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Materials, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Materials 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.MaterialsWikipedia:WikiProject MaterialsTemplate:WikiProject MaterialsMaterials articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

No discussion[edit]

A collaboration with no discussion??
I've cleaned up some glaring grammar errors and removed some absurdities & nonsense. My real feeling is that this should go to Rfd. Vsmith 22:28, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Alison Chaiken 04:47, 26 September 2005 (UTC): In general I'm a bit perplexed about the desired technical level for Wikipedia articles. Scientists like me who contribute content could soar way above the head of the general reader and that's what I've mostly done in my writing. Undoubtedly this isn't desirable though. Should an article be at the level of the Brittanica? I have not seen guidelines which address this question. I'm assuming that articles on arcane technical topics (like the one I wrote on exchange bias) will be read by people with arcane interests. I'm not sure who the audience for Impurity will be.[reply]

As you like. I don't have much idea. I just created the page per requested pages. D e ryc k C. 08:34, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merging[edit]

I oppose the merge. The other article focuses on food substance impurities, which is a subdivision, and a link should serve this purpose well enough. Merging is not needed. --Der yck C. 07:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sexual impurity[edit]

There is also a concept a concept of sexual impurity, but I think that it is already included within sexual purity, which redirects to chastity. ADM (talk) 12:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: CHEM 300[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 January 2024 and 26 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tritium123 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Firebirdrebirth.

— Assignment last updated by UBC24 AT (talk) 04:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to change the title and subtitles, so they give a better sense of the article. I will be adding images to showcase impurities, and adding more references that will be cited in the text. I will also be changing the wording of some phases to improve clarity. Lastly, I may add an additional section about wanted/beneficial impurities or flush out the topics in the “destructive impurities” section. (Unsigned statement on March 12th by Tritium123)

I strongly suggest you do not change the title without first getting approval from the larger community. In particular post to WT:PHYS and WT:CHEM. Ldm1954 (talk) 05:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]