Talk:Isocyanate

Isocyanates are solids

There's a general sentence that says isocyanates are solids 100% and non volatiles, which is not true. Methyl isocyanate, phenylisocyanate, tert-butyl isocyanate... are liquids and volatiles. So... I am deleting it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masohe (talk • contribs) 15:42, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Useful Material Lost

it seems to be that some useful material eg production reactions has been lost over the lifetime of this article. perhaps someone would like to go back through the edits and put some of it back in. some seems to be well referenced and relevant 86.9.94.225 (talk) 12:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that happens every so often with vandalism. There have been numerous times when I've gone back through history and restored sections of articles deleted by vandalism. Right now, I don't feel I have the time to do it with this article yet. H Padleckas (talk) 04:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Bit of a How-to guide

The article needs to be rewritten so it does not read like a How-to guide. Also, the health and safety stuff makes the article read like a company policy manual. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 05:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Additon of how to remove isocyanates removed

In March 2026 I added a valuable section about how to remove isocyanates from prepolymers based on my job experience in short path and thin film distillation technology. Unfortunatelly this has been removed on March 20th, 2026 with the comment that 43% ZeroGPT rating (which is actually stating that at a 57% chance this is not an AI generated text). This is just to clarify that this is not an unfiltered AI text but a text based on my professional expertise which might be useful to anyone dealing with fullfilling standards limiting the allowed amount of isocyanates which I slightly refined with AI since I am a non native speaker what you might see here in this not AI refined text. So I leave it to the community here if they rate my addition worthwile to recover it. In general I am not sure if an AI-recognition tool is really the best way to decide about a text's quality. Just think of brilliant scientific minds (and here I am not talking about myself, I know out there are so many other experts and genius) with tons of worthwhile scientific knowledge to share that are just not good in writing. They might use AI to make their content a nice text and check it before publishing. But once they know that their texts anyway get removed either if they do them alone for bad style or, of they do them with AI for using AI, they might stop to contribute which is time consuming. Meanwhile even some universities step back from the practice of in genereally abandon AI content ... So just some food for thinking ... WikiCat369 (talk) 09:56, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. It does seem that someone attributed your contribution to AI incorrectly. Anyway, I revised your wording and moved it to our article on polyurethane. It would be helpful if some of your references were higher quality.--Smokefoot (talk) 14:59, 24 April 2026 (UTC)