Talk:chemical database

chemical database

 * Moved from WT:RFV to WT:RFD. --Connel MacKenzie 02:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a sum of parts Hekaheka 17:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, I suppose that someone might think that if a relational database is built of relations, then a chemical database might be made of chemicals? SemperBlotto 21:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Only a moron.&mdash;msh210 &#x2120; 12:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Not necessarily. Think of someone discussing the animal brain in comparison to a computer. They might well refer to the brain's memory as a 'chemical database' (actual SOP usage). Of course, a computer's memory is made up of chemicals as well. Moglex 16:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, the classic and timeless moron argument. Funny we wouldn't think of computer memory being made up of chemicals. Must be a different sense, one that we seem to be missing. DAVilla 17:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Point of order: Since the use of this term is not being questioned -- and since providing 3 valid cites would not resolve the issue -- this should really be listed on WT:RFD instead. -- Visviva 14:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia's definition is more persuasively non-compositional than ours: "a database specifically designed to store chemical information." So it seems that if I exported Wiktionary's entries for chemical names to a database, this would be a database of chemicals but not a chemical database sensu stricto.  I'm not entirely convinced, though. -- Visviva 14:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Nor I. Weak delete. DAVilla 17:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)