Talk:4-Aminophenol

Different compound?

[…] it is commonly used as a developer in black-and-white film, marketed under the name Rodinal.

As far as i know the active ingredient in Rodinal is 4-aminophenol chloride (see http://www.digitaltruth.com/data/rodinal.php). There is any verifiable ref for the above statement?Atelierelealbe (talk) 14:10, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Good catch. For many articles on amines, we don't carefully distinguish the degree of protonation when it comes to commercial formulations, probably because we don't know those details. So I think that the current statement is probably ok. The redox properties of the amino phenol would however be affected rather strongly.--Smokefoot (talk) 15:02, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Jacobson's Manual of Photography says they use "an alkali salt of 4-aminophenol". Other sources talk about 2-chloro-4-aminophenol and N-methyl-4-aminophenol. This book treats the term as synonymous with Rodinal, Azol, and other terms. It might make sense to mention that it may come in a salt, since it's the ion in solution that matters. Dicklyon (talk) 18:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Chemical compound

4-Aminophenol is a chemical compound. It is a breakdown product of paracetamol.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joknee (talk • contribs).

It is also used for the synthesis of paracetamol. This is a common experiment in university level organic chemistry classes. Fuzzform 22:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Merge_proposal

Looks like duplicate articles: Aminophenol and 4-aminophenol. Bobjgalindo (talk) 14:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

 Done Fixed now. Physchim62 (talk) 19:32, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

pKa

Anyone know where that pKa came from? http://research.chem.psu.edu/brpgroup/pKa_compilation.pdf gives it as 10.3. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielthechemist (talk • contribs) 21:17, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

It is listed at 4.5 in "pKa Data Compiled by R. Williams", a down-loaded pdf of which many seem to be using for organic acids and bases. 10.3 is perhaps the pK_b. --Smokefoot (talk) 00:40, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

no, it is listed as 10.3. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielthechemist (talk • contribs) 15:20, 30 September 2015 (UTC)