Talk:Fulvic acid

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 November 2016. The result of the discussion was keep.

Agriculture Mid‑importance

	Agriculture portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture articles
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chemicals Low‑importance

	This redirect 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 redirect or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Soil Mid‑importance

	Earth sciences portal Fulvic acid is within the scope of WikiProject Soil, which collaborates on Soil and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.SoilWikipedia:WikiProject SoilTemplate:WikiProject SoilSoil articles
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disputing use of term in other article[edit]

A source supporting that fulvic acids contribute to pedosphere is needed to retain mention of fulvic acid in that article. -- Paleorthid (talk) 22:22, 23 January 2019 (UTC). corrected from 17:57, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation needed[edit]

There are two disparate materials covered under the term fulvic acid. They differ in chemical make-up, and use. The product form is in a bottle on store shelves. The product form gets used in research as a soil amendment. The natural form is more of an intellectual construct, tied to an evolving understanding of soil.

Fulvic acid (The product, only exists in lab) – (The more common use of the term). Industrial chemical. Use in article: ...This is the only method that the California departments of agriculture will accept when registering a product.
Fulvic acid in soil (only exists in nature) – (Most of this article content. Content needs to be moved to new article). Use in article: ...one of two classes of natural acidic organic polymers that can be extracted...

The problem with this article is not in isolation. Attempts to redefine 'humic substances' in valid terms have resulted in a proliferation of incompatible definitions, "with far-reaching implications beyond our ability to communicate scientifically accurate soil processes and properties."^[1] Without disambiguation, the reader is left with the very false impression that the two materials—natural-class <> industrial-product—are chemically identical. Refer to Wikipedia:Article titles#Disambiguation and WP:D. -- Paleorthid (talk) 19:34, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update The alternative to my suggestion—creating a second article—is to instead distinguish between the two in the article. That is what I have started to do in the humic substances article. -- Paleorthid (talk) 22:09, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Lehmann, J.; Kleber, M. (2015-12-03). "The contentious nature of soil organic matter". Nature. 528 (7580): 60–8. Bibcode:2015Natur.528...60L. doi:10.1038/nature16069. PMID 26595271. The issue has also been approached by redefining 'humic substances' as the portion of soil organic matter that cannot be molecularly characterized or by calling all soil organic matter 'humus'. We argue that this compromise - maintaining terminology but altering its meanings in varying ways — hampers scientific progress beyond the soil sciences.The [need for accurate models] of soil organic matter does not allow a confusing middle path; it requires leaving the traditional view behind to bring about lasting innovation and progress. This is critical as scientific fields outside the soil sciences base their research on the false premise of the existence of 'humic substances'. Thus an issue of terminology becomes a problem of false inference, with far-reaching implications beyond our ability to communicate scientifically accurate soil processes and properties.

[1] Lehmann, J.; Kleber, M. (2015-12-03). "The contentious nature of soil organic matter". Nature. 528 (7580): 60–8. Bibcode:2015Natur.528...60L. doi:10.1038/nature16069. PMID 26595271. The issue has also been approached by redefining 'humic substances' as the portion of soil organic matter that cannot be molecularly characterized or by calling all soil organic matter 'humus'. We argue that this compromise - maintaining terminology but altering its meanings in varying ways — hampers scientific progress beyond the soil sciences.The [need for accurate models] of soil organic matter does not allow a confusing middle path; it requires leaving the traditional view behind to bring about lasting innovation and progress. This is critical as scientific fields outside the soil sciences base their research on the false premise of the existence of 'humic substances'. Thus an issue of terminology becomes a problem of false inference, with far-reaching implications beyond our ability to communicate scientifically accurate soil processes and properties.

[1]