In the mechanism, the hypochlorous acid should not have a positive charge...DMelvinKaphan (talk) 05:49, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
I think the author is using those numbers to indicate the formal oxidation state of chlorine in each chloro-intermediate. AdderUser (talk) 15:06, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
I replaced some of them with images or text that do not have oxidation-state labels. Would be easy enough to include them in more standard notation (usually roman numerals) if someone would like, but it seemed like these redox states/changes were not relevant to the surrounding text. Will get to the remaining cases shortly. DMacks (talk) 20:31, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
All done. DMacks (talk) 21:49, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
The current third example (10-Dec-2012), the alpha-Bu3Sn alkenone, is a methyl ketone RCOCH3. It should probably be the aldehyde RCOH. If the starting material IS, in fact, the ketone, the net transformation of RCOCH3 to RCOOH is the haloform reaction which proceeds by a different mechanism. AdderUser (talk) 15:11, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
There is absolutely no reason to call the reaction as it is currently called (according to Pinnick). Anyone bothering to look up the original paper by Pinnick et al will wonder how this association came about in the first place. The paper did not introduce anything new, but evaluated several known methods for a specific application. It featured 1 example (!) of Lindgrens chlorite oxidation in the variation with amylene as chlorine quencher, earlier introduced by Kraus et al. Pinnick et al correctly cited the earlier work by Lindgren and Kraus, so there was no reason why anyone would ascribe this reaction to him, he simply applied a known procedure.2001:4CA0:2FFF:11:0:0:0:111 (talk) 13:27, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
The real name should be Lindgren chlorite oxidation, or just "sodium chlorite oxidation of aldehydes" to leave out personal or 19th century style nationalistic animosities.2001:4CA0:2FFF:11:0:0:0:111 (talk) 13:30, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
I don't see mention of any animosities in our article or its cited refs. But instead, we have two "name reactions" dictionaries that both give "Pinnick Oxidation" as the name for this reaction. Wikipedia is constrained to use what reliable secondary sources say, so you would need multiple strong references to give it a different name instead. I don't even see "Lindgrens oxidation" or similar names used as a synonym in those refs. Our article seems to correctly credit the other authors with the underlying/original reaction. DMacks (talk) 14:25, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
CH3CN is written without subscript 3 in scheme on 'Scope and Limitations' section. If anyone has acess to original file, please fix it. If it was lost, I can redraw the scheme correctly
@Fungi6x: Good eye! User: Arzagh, who created File:Examples of Pinnick oxidation.png on commons, has not been active on any wikipedia sites since September, and most editors I know don't keep their ChemDraw (or whatever) originals of quick chemical diagrams. If it's easy for you to do, I'd say redo it. Otherwise I can do it. DMacks (talk) 22:33, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
@Fungi6x: Looks great thanks! If you're interested in working on these sorts of edits, the commons site has a backlog of chemical diagrams that are tagged with concerns about quality and/or factual disputes. DMacks (talk) 11:24, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
@Arzagh: I'm sorry everyone, I don't come here often and didn't see the mention. I only keep note of the pages that have minor problems and fix them when I have some free time. Thank you for fixing that detail!
Note: I moved the fixed file to the name of the deleted old one. --Leyo 20:10, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
From my (potentially flawed) understanding, these two oxidation methods are functionally similar with insufficient individual coverage, and thus should be merged. This paper (as well as the Lindgren oxidation article) states that Lindgren originally came up with the reaction, which was then further developed by Kraus & Pinnick. While both names are used ("Lindgren oxidation", "Pinnick oxidation"), several pieces in the literature refer to the reaction with sodium chlorite in acid and some scavenger reagent as the "Lindgren-Kraus-Pinnick oxidation" (1, 2, 3) or "Pinnick-Lindgren-Kraus oxidation" (4, 5, 6, 7). Footnote 18 in this paper states that the Lindgren oxidation "is also known in the literature as the Pinnick oxidation" further suggests that the two names refer to the same reaction.
They do appear to share a root. My read is that Lindgren developed the general method first, while Pinnick refined it as a tool for the selective oxidation α,β-unsaturated aldehydes (Template:DOI). Pinnick–Lindgren oxidation, with the usual single-name redirects, might be an acceptable option. Project Osprey (talk) 13:37, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
Thanks @Project Osprey. It does seem like "Pinnick-Lindgren oxidation" is used as a name for the reaction in some of the literature, as well (1, 2, 3, 4). Would it be possible to merge & rename at the same time? Best, Staraction (talk·contribs) 09:46, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
