Talk:Peroxymonosulfuric acid

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Chemicals Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

this article represents a merger of what once was persulfuric acid and monoperoxysufuric.--Smokefoot 04:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about a page on persulfuric anhydride? -lysdexia 02:31, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Just added a section on dangers, seeing as this acid can peroxidize organic compounds. Omede 17:18, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it true that if the sulphuric acid is poured into a container and then hydrogen peroxide is poured into that - it will explode? as opposed to first pouring in the hydrogen peroxide and then pouring in suphuric acid? LPM

The talk page for a wikipedia article is not a forum for discussing the article subject matter itself, but changes or additions to the article, or problems with the article. loupgarous 00:01, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Reference 3 seems rather dubious. There is no active link, a search on Google Scholar returns nothing for this reaction, or the patent numbers listed, or anything chemistry related by P L Martin, and chemistry text books do not list this reaction as a method for producing Peroxymonosulfuric acid. I suggest the reaction this reference refers to be taken out.Dr Bloke (talk) 13:43, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Google Patent returns 5 patents for peroxysulfuric acid-related inventions for "Perry L. Martin". None of them are a direct match for the patent application listed in our article. There are no matches with that US patent application number online that aren't WP:CIRCULAR to our article.

I agree with you we ought to delete the existing reference, which doesn't have an online match. I also think that the sentence citing it has no match to a reliable source that I've been able to find, so it's effectively unsourced. I'm removing both the sentence and the reference.

Thanks for the catch! loupgarous (talk) 00:04, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]