Talk:Chemical bonding model

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Officer781 in topic Merge and change to disambig

Neologism

edit

The issue of neologism was raised with this page's original title "molecular bonding model". Chemists often interchange the terms "chemical" and "molecular" as appropriate. In interest of staying with the encyclopedia motif I switched the title from "molecular bonding model" to "chemical bonding model" which is a more common term (and in the title of a number of books). I now worry that the way the page is written, to accommodate the new title, repeats too much of the same material as the "chemical bond" page. Should this information be incorporated into chemical bond? Is it possible to get an editor with an established chemistry background to offer an opinion?--OMCV (talk) 06:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Reconsideration

edit

After spending some time on wikipedia I'm now pro-delete on this article. I started the article and argued to keep it. It was kind of people to let me have an opportunity to learn the system. This article is orphaned for a reason, if someone wanted to delete this I wouldn't oppose them.--OMCV (talk) 01:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

It could be merged to Chemical bond, which mostly talks about MO and VB. Summary of CFT and LFT (which the other article doesn't talk about) can be added as a new subsection. --D昌양 (Talk) 06:50, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

History of chemical bonding theory

edit

I started a historical timeline today of the history of chemical bonding theories (after coming across a note in David Lindley's 2001 Boltzmann's Atom, which said that Josef Loschmidt innovated the double and triple line method of representing double and triple bonds), which might help to give this Wikipedia article direction:

If anyone knows who conceived of the 17th century “glued atom” bonding theory or the “stuck together by conspiring motion” theory, that Newton mentions, or other interesting bonding theories, please feel free to leave a note. --Libb Thims (talk) 19:46, 16 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Merge and change to disambig

edit

I have merged the content into covalent bond and changed this page to a disambiguation.--Officer781 (talk) 23:58, 2 February 2019 (UTC)Reply