Talk:Cymene

Merge proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To not merge on the grounds of independent notability of the compounds and the capacity for expansion. Klbrain (talk) 19:03, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

m-Cymene and o-Cymene and p-Cymene duplicate information and could be better dealt with under the one article Cymenes. Cheers, Polyamorph (talk) 15:42, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The chemboxes are however different and it would not be good to put them all in the same article. We will have to check if there is more information that could go in the text that would differentiate the isomers as individually notable. I would generally prefer a split, as that is how the encyclopedia grows. Cymene can remain a chemistry index page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:50, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. There should be one article on cymene with the general information,and separate articles for each distinct compound. That is a very common arrangement in Wikipedia. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 21:37, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Diisopropylbenzenes which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:49, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]