Talk:Alicyclic compound

The aliphatic page states that cyclic compounds and alicyclic compounds are not aliphatic, contradictory with this page.

There is great confusion here, yes. The above is wrong. This page says "Alicyclic compounds may or may not have aliphatic side chains attached" - if they don't, they are not alicyclic but cyclic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.94.86 (talk) 21:05, 4 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

• Bulleted list item

I think the caption "Cyclohexene is an alicyclic compound with a double bond" for the 2nd inset is an unfortunate formulation. (It's like the sophism "Ethanol is ethane with a hydroxyl group".) May I suggest to be replaced by e.g. "Cyclohexene can be considered a derivate from alicyclic cyclohexane containing a double bond".

The Baldwin's rules page shows examples of organic compounds with unsaturated functional groups (triple bond, ester). But these type of compounds are not alicyclic.

Last phrase under Cycloalkenes thread ("The placement of double bonds in many alicyclic compounds can be predicted with Bredt's rule.")Ichimescu (talk) 00:26, 9 January 2018 (UTC) is even more evidently in contradiction with the definition of alicyclic compounds given in the article ("both saturated and cyclic", thus they do not have double bonds). This remark agrees with a comment on the same issue leading to confusion already made in a previous talk/section.Reply

Best regards. Ichimescu (talk) 00:23, 9 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect Homocyclic has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 27 § Homocyclic until a consensus is reached. 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)Reply