Category talk:Ascorbic acid

This category is very messy and it should be cleaned up. Imo this should be limited to ascorbic acid only (L- and D-forms) and the Category:Vitamin C should collect all the derivatives and other loosly connected graphics. Wostr (talk) 02:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

• And the new Category:Chemistry of ascorbic acid does not make it less messy, quite the opposite in fact. Pinging the author @Allforrous: . Wostr (talk) 02:28, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Proposition:

• Category:Vitamin C (category shouldn't be included in chemical compounds category tree as it contains many different subcategories)
  • Category:Ascorbic acid (or renaming it to Category:L-Ascorbic acid if the category for D- isomer is also needed)
    • Category:Chemistry of ascorbic acid
      • Category:Ascorbic acid biosynthesis
    • Category:Microscopic images of ascorbic acid
  • Category:Erythorbic acid
  • Category:Scurvy
  • Category:Albert Szent-Györgyi‎
  • Category:Dehydroascorbic acid

Wostr (talk) 02:43, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

OK.I agree. --Allforrous (talk) 11:25, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Ascorbic acid has 4 chiral isomeres, one of them is L-Ascorbic acid AKA vitamin C. Thus, "vitamin C" is a subclass of "ascorbic acid". Therefore, "ascorbic acid" should NOT be a subcategory of "vitamin C". I agree that this cat has been messy for a long time. One of the reasons is of course English wikipedia and its excellent policies resulting in the "fact" that "ascorbic acid" is NOT notable and must NOT have an article. Taylor 49 (talk) 10:27, 28 March 2023 (UTC)